Alex Huntley wrote:
I don't regret that GHDL is written in Ada at all - it is a brilliant language with some real strengths, plus it's close similarity with VHDL makes it much easier for VHDL engineers to pick up than C/C++. GCC/Gnat can still compile a mix of Ada and C/C++ anyway so using either one does not stop you from interfacing to the other.
<snip>
I think it's better to concentrate development of GHDL as a really good VHDL simulator than try to make it the jack of all trades and master of none
it's roughly my opinion too :-) GHDL works very well, is free, standards-abiding, and can interface to C-written code. Now I'm sure other people need more and that's fine as well. Ok, performance is not stellar, but here is a free tip : compile your VHDL code with -Wc,O2 (or something like that, i'll have to recheck) and you get a free boost from the compiler which usually favors single-stepping ease in gdb (and that bloats the code which runs quite slow from all the stack accesses). Now, I wonder how to influence the compile options of the standard library modules. Turning the right knobs should provide some easy speedup on common code without requiring deep changes in the ADA source code. As usual, I don't lack ideas but time so sorry if i'm just moving air again... yg -- http://ygdes.com / http://yasep.org _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
