[Oberon] There are considerable differences between Lola-1 and Lola-2; are you aware of that?

[Pablo Cayuela]

Dear Rochus,

I've used the Lola from the nineties only for simulation in Oberon for DOS
& Windows, and when Project Oberon was renewed and ported to an FPGA by
Prof. Wirth and Paul Reed, I've implemented PO in the original board that
they used. I found that Lola was not ported as a tool in that minimalist
Oberon.
After seeing the Risc5 being implemented in Verilog, I asked Prof. Wirth if
he plans to have a Lola version, he said may be; and some time after I
discovered that he published the new Lola-2 and the Risc5, as Paul already
said, as an experiment resurrecting another old project, Lola, with
modifications this time to be simpler to translate to Verilog to implement
on a current FPGA. I suspect that's why this new version is closer to some
constructs of Verilog, and does not have all the constructions of original
Lola to teach a structured way of describe circuits.

One more article illuminating the original use of Lola:

ftp://ftp.inf.ethz.ch/doc/tech-reports/1xx/198.abstract
ftp://ftp.inf.ethz.ch/doc/tech-reports/1xx/198.ps

Best regards,
Pablo Cayuela

El vie., 15 de mar. de 2019 20:18, rochus.keller at bluewin.ch <
rochus.keller at bluewin.ch> escribió:

> Gentlemen:
>
> After a first round trip through the papers/reports/articles I was pointed
> to by Pablo Cayuela I got the impression that not every participant in the
> discussion might have the same notions about Lola.
>
> Are you aware that there were e.g. IF and FOR statements as well as
> composite and parametrized types in Lola-1 which are no longer present in
> Lola-2 (at least not in the language report dated on 1.9.2015 which I
> downloaded from here:
> https://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Lola/Lola2.pdf). There might be
> good reasons for that and I'm still reading, but I am beginning to
> understand why the discussants have so different views about the
> capabilities of the language.
>
> My initial question concerned Lola-2 which was the only version I've dealt
> with so far. So let me ask Paul Reed, Wojciech Skulski, and Pablo Cayuela
> whether your answer really referred to this version, and not to Lola-1.
> From what I've seen up to now I think the version is quite relevant for the
> expressiveness on behavioral level.
>
> Best
> R.
> --
> Oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
> https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/oberon
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.inf.ethz.ch/pipermail/oberon/attachments/20190316/21a49726/attachment.html>