3 ms·

I doubt verilator is much slower. The speed of it is insane. They are indeed more complex and difficult to understand. But I fail to see how that is a criterium

I doubt verilator is much slower. The speed of it is insane. They are indeed more complex and difficult to understand. But I fail to see how that is a criterium. I would very much rather include an industry standard library in comparison to something homegrown.

LoganDark 3y ago
> They are indeed more complex and difficult to understand. But I fail to see how that is a criterium. It's... not? Like, if you want to merely use an ISA, you don't need it to be simple or easy to understand, in fact tons of people pride themselves on making extremely high-performance RISC-V cores with OoOE and so on. But the reason why someone might want a C implementation of an ISA is different from the reason people might want to go implement an ISA in a real project: maybe they want a software simulator that is easy to understand for one reason or another, perhaps for learning or demonstration purposes, or just as a fun hobby project. These people wouldn't benefit from just pulling down Verilator or using one of the existing BATTLE-TESTED INDUSTRY-STANDARD PROFESSIONALLY-AUDITED HIGH-PERFORMANCE implementations because they literally don't care about any of those things. In any case, it's a fallacy to assume that every programming project out there has to address a need in order to have a place. https://justforfunnoreally.dev https://justforfunnoreally.dev
- rowanG077 3y ago
  Yes a hobby/learning is a great reason, why not just start with that? I was simply wondering what the reason was. Maybe the author had an interesting need for a C implementation to do something. Me asking for the reason is not me saying it doesn't deserve to exist. I don't think you are arguing in good faith here.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    > why not just start with that? I'm not the one who started the thread. > I don't think you are arguing in good faith here. With that, this discussion is over.

LoganDark 3y ago

> They are indeed more complex and difficult to understand. But I fail to see how that is a criterium. It's... not? Like, if you want to merely use an ISA, you don't need it to be simple or easy to understand, in fact tons of people pride themselves on making extremely high-performance RISC-V cores with OoOE and so on. But the reason why someone might want a C implementation of an ISA is different from the reason people might want to go implement an ISA in a real project: maybe they want a software simulator that is easy to understand for one reason or another, perhaps for learning or demonstration purposes, or just as a fun hobby project. These people wouldn't benefit from just pulling down Verilator or using one of the existing BATTLE-TESTED INDUSTRY-STANDARD PROFESSIONALLY-AUDITED HIGH-PERFORMANCE implementations because they literally don't care about any of those things. In any case, it's a fallacy to assume that every programming project out there has to address a need in order to have a place. https://justforfunnoreally.dev https://justforfunnoreally.dev

rowanG077 3y ago
Yes a hobby/learning is a great reason, why not just start with that? I was simply wondering what the reason was. Maybe the author had an interesting need for a C implementation to do something. Me asking for the reason is not me saying it doesn't deserve to exist. I don't think you are arguing in good faith here.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  > why not just start with that? I'm not the one who started the thread. > I don't think you are arguing in good faith here. With that, this discussion is over.