Re: gEDA-dev: Last call for input on SOW for Linux Fund....

[r <nbs_dot_public-at-NOSPAMgmail_dot_com>]

This discussion is getting long and probably a bit off-topic but the
problem is so interesting I can't resist to add a comment. ;-)

As a mixed-signal designer I do not find verilog-ams particularly
useful as a design description language. And yes, I am working on very
complex mixed-signal circuits, which are used in even more complex
systems.

What IMHO vams is designed for is functional _digital_ simulation. A
mixed-signal or analog designer makes a simplified functional model of
his circuit (preferably before starting work on the transistor level
design) so that a digital designer can plug it into his system and see
if all bits are connected correctly. That's probably main reason why
mixed-signal simulators moved from analog simulators with a digital
plugin to digital simulators with analog plugins. This is btw very
similar to the System-C story, which is mainly about giving software
designers a bigger picture of the system.

It doesn't mean I am not using mixed-signal simulators. I use them
quite a lot but probably not quite the way their designers expected me
to do it. For me, vams is mostly a great design instrumentation tool.
For this reason I would prefer vams to be more transparent, to permit
breaking design encapsulation rules etc (just like debuggers do -
nobody complains that gdb permits looking into local variables etc.).

Regards,
-r.


_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev