Re: Block return values (myhdl.BlockError)

On 13/05/16 15:45, Jos Huisken wrote:
> Jan Decaluwe <jan <at> jandecaluwe.com> writes:
> 
>> > I have nothing against collecting good ideas.
>> > 
>> > However, for this specific feature, I am unconvinced
>> > that the additional complexity is warranted. I may
>> > change that opinion with future evidence - until
>> > now it has only been brought up once as an alternative
>> > possibility and does not seem enough.
> I didn't expect to raise such discussion ;-), and I guess we have to give 
> it more thought. I have used all kinds of return values, next to Signals, 
> especially in testbenches. The example I showed was a small part of a 
> template based testbench+design which I will revisit, hopefully soon,  
> with the current simplification.
> 

Do you have any of this code to share?

I've made an attempt with Veriutils
(https://github.com/hgomersall/Veriutils) to solve the problem of HDL
tests needing lots of boilerplate (think random vectors, clock
generators, reset initialisation) and integrating that with a framework
for a poor man's cosimulation (when the tools don't allow "proper"
cosimulation e.g. Vivado), by recording MyHDL signals and playing them
back inside the testbench.

I'm interested to know about alternative tools to make the process of
verification simpler and more robust.

Cheers,

Henry

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j