35 ms·

Python Logic Simulation Library

gsmecher 2y ago
These experiments are always unique, and each is interesting in its own way. Can you comment on the use of asynchronous code rather than generators? For example, here's a throw-away example of a clock using generators and a syntax that's otherwise similar to yours: from more_itertools import take def drv_clock(): while True: yield "1b1" yield "1b0" for x in take(10, drv_clock()): print(x) I have written signal flow graphs (including feedback) using a generator-style approach, intended to prototype datapaths that are then manually translated into RTL. It's different, but not completely different.
- woadwarrior01 2y ago
  > Can you comment on the use of asynchronous code rather than generators? I'm not the OP. IIUC, async functions are implemented using generators under the hood. cf: The asyncio.coroutine decorator from Python 3.4, before async await syntax was implemented in Python 3.5 (PEP 492).
  - cjdrake 2y ago
    Correct in this case. In src/seqlogic/sim.py there are four usages of 'yield' keyword that suspend the current coroutine and return control to the event loop.
- cjdrake 2y ago
  As mentioned in another answer, deep down there's not much difference. Personally, I find async/await more elegant for concurrent algorithm design (e.g. https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/blob/main/ipynb/dining_philosophers.ipynb https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/blob/main/ipynb/dining_p...). But control threads like a clock/reset aren't the main idea. Look at the example RISC V core for the design style we're attempting (https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/tree/main/tests/riscv/core https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/tree/main/tests/riscv/co...). No async/await or yields anywhere. It's described in a structural way, and a couple layers of Python hide the details.
avnd 2y ago
Pretty cool! Have you heard of PyRTL? https://ucsbarchlab.github.io/PyRTL/ https://ucsbarchlab.github.io/PyRTL/
- cjdrake 2y ago
  Nice documentation :).

These experiments are always unique, and each is interesting in its own way. Can you comment on the use of asynchronous code rather than generators? For example, here's a throw-away example of a clock using generators and a syntax that's otherwise similar to yours: from more_itertools import take def drv_clock(): while True: yield "1b1" yield "1b0" for x in take(10, drv_clock()): print(x) I have written signal flow graphs (including feedback) using a generator-style approach, intended to prototype datapaths that are then manually translated into RTL. It's different, but not completely different.

woadwarrior01 2y ago
> Can you comment on the use of asynchronous code rather than generators? I'm not the OP. IIUC, async functions are implemented using generators under the hood. cf: The asyncio.coroutine decorator from Python 3.4, before async await syntax was implemented in Python 3.5 (PEP 492).
- cjdrake 2y ago
  Correct in this case. In src/seqlogic/sim.py there are four usages of 'yield' keyword that suspend the current coroutine and return control to the event loop.
cjdrake 2y ago
As mentioned in another answer, deep down there's not much difference. Personally, I find async/await more elegant for concurrent algorithm design (e.g. https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/blob/main/ipynb/dining_philosophers.ipynb https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/blob/main/ipynb/dining_p...). But control threads like a clock/reset aren't the main idea. Look at the example RISC V core for the design style we're attempting (https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/tree/main/tests/riscv/core https://github.com/cjdrake/seqlogic/tree/main/tests/riscv/co...). No async/await or yields anywhere. It's described in a structural way, and a couple layers of Python hide the details.

avnd 2y ago

Pretty cool! Have you heard of PyRTL? https://ucsbarchlab.github.io/PyRTL/ https://ucsbarchlab.github.io/PyRTL/

cjdrake 2y ago
Nice documentation :).