olofk Posted December 14, 2015 Report Share Posted December 14, 2015 Hi, I looked at the file types in IEEE 1685-2014 and noticed that there are neither a vhdlSource-2008, nor a verilogSource-2005. Both would be useful to distinguish version-specific features such as $clog2 for vlog2005 and all the new stuff in VHDL 2008. Are there any plans to add this to an upcoming revision? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christian-gab.fraisse Posted December 17, 2015 Report Share Posted December 17, 2015 Hi, Discussions are on going to integrate these new versions in the enumeration of fileTypes or with another mechanism. ( Missing recent versions like : VerilogSource-2005 systemVerilogSource-2007 , systemVerilogSource-2009, systemVerilogSource-2012 vhdlSource-2002, vhdlSource-2008) Probably the next version of the standard will integrate it. By the way, there is same discussion around directorySource fileType when managing directory. Regards, Christian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnteaton Posted December 20, 2015 Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 I don't see how you could ever hope to put these items in a standard and not have it obsolete by the next day. I am now working with code written in chisel so I use fileType user for now but what happens when chisel is added as a fileType? Do all my files break or do I have to check for either case? John Eaton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olofk Posted December 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 @John That's a very good point. I believe we are about to see an explosion of new hardware modelling languages in the coming years, and it will be very hard for IP-Xact to keep up with this. On the other hand, it's nice to have standardized names for the ones that IP-Xact do know about. One solution for this could be to have a sub tag for the user tag that allows setting a custom name. This could serve as a staging area for coming revisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnteaton Posted December 21, 2015 Report Share Posted December 21, 2015 Olof, Standardized names only work if you have a single organization with enough clout to impose their naming conventions onto the entire industry. Those companies are very rare and suffer from a problem with lag time. A lone developer needs a new name NOW and may not be able to guess the final name is that will be chosen. The beauty of IP-Xact is that anyone with a valid URL can create VLNV descriptors that are unique through out the world. We need an IP-Xact file where you can create a new fileType with your name and VLNV. If anyone else uses the same language with a different name then they can extend your VLNV to alias their name. That way when their components reference their names it gets translated into your names. This will probably be similar to how buses can be extended using a new VLNV. John Eaton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olofk Posted December 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 21, 2015 Ah! That is a much better solution. Hope to see things moving in this direction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.