[Oberon] What is the status of Lola-2 and its use in the FPGAversion of Project Oberon?
paulreed at paddedcell.com
Fri Mar 15 15:40:56 CET 2019
> In modern FPGA programming the code is
> more often expressed behaviorally [than] RTL style...
Yeah, you said this before, without backing it up and without giving a
useful worked example. I've also had other similar dogmatic opinions
from FPGA people without much edification. And their code [if any] is,
well, let's just say... amazing. :)
> tell the compiler "here is what I intend, go and figure it out". Most
> FPGA coding is done this way these days.
LOL. Good luck with that... Vendor sales pitch, surely? They have a
vested interest in convincing you it's all too hard for meagre humans.
But seriously, again, a working example would be nice showing pros and
>> If a feature requires special features not
>> supported by Lola, I wrap it in Verilog. The main cause of this
>> currently is library identifiers (e.g. "_" characters), but in fact
>> really wrapping the nonportable pieces.
> Is there any special reason to not change Lola such that the main
> cause is just eliminated?
You mean the main cause of the subordinate cause? No. I sometimes add
"_" to Prof. Wirth's scanners, but more often not, these days. It can
be useful to have nicer-looking identifiers come from the Lola, and
enforce that. C used this trick once upon a time. But knock yourself
out, it's not a hard thing to add.
More information about the Oberon