Subject: Re: Comments on DirectC
From: Alain Raynaud (alain@tensilica.com)
Date: Thu Sep 26 2002 - 10:42:18 PDT
I have some questions about the Tuesday's presentation on DirectC.
Mostly I liked it, but I have some clarifying questions.
1) is DirectC a language or an API (or both)? I didn't quite understand
the mechanism by which the preprocessor extracts C code from a Verilog
file.
2) I liked some concepts such as the idea that Verilog modules could be
replaced by C modules transparently. This looks a lot like the FLI in
VHDL and it's a good thing. Is this extended to functions and tasks?
Ideally, the caller should not have to know whether it is calling
Verilog or DirectC: the function name should not change, for instance
(and adding "$" in front of a name is a change).
3) Regarding calling Verilog tasks from DirectC, is there any technical
reason why it can't be done (syntax, scheduling...)? Otherwise, I assume
we could add it at some point, since there is so much demand for it. And
it fits the idea above that C and Verilog modules and tasks could be
swapped transparently.
4) I agree with the comment that DirectC should not reinvent the whole
PLI, especially the callback mechanisms.
Alain Raynaud
Tensilica, Inc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Sep 26 2002 - 10:43:37 PDT