X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-SourceIP: 95.97.163.245
X-Authenticated-Sender: b DOT mykendevelopment AT upcmail DOT nl
Message-ID: <521B8AD4.4020000@iae.nl>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 19:05:24 +0200
From: myken <myken AT iae DOT nl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
CC: Stefan Salewski <mail AT ssalewski DOT de>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Tutorial: VHDL with gEDA
References: <521B22D8 DOT 3030707 AT iae DOT nl> <1377531768 DOT 2150 DOT 11 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
In-Reply-To: <1377531768.2150.11.camel@AMD64X2.fritz.box>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

> Fine -- indeed I was wondering in the last weeks what you was doing with
> gEDA and VHDL -- my initial guess was that you tried to generate
> schematics from VHDL code.
You are absolutely right. That was/is my primary trigger. But first I 
had to figure out how the gschem to VHDL path works. So why not let 
everybody profit from my work ;-)
Unfortunately I got stonewalled by the way gschem/gnetlist (VHDL 
backend) handles buses. I haven't solved that one.
> Maybe you should start your tutorial indeed with a short remark what you
> intend -- starting with statements about bugs is very negative in
Good point. I'll add an introduction.
> general. And from my knowledge the way schematic -> VHDL is not very
> common, VHDL was invented to allow textual input, maybe generate
> schematic output for verifying the result. Of course the direction
> schematic VHDL may be justified, i.e. for very special digital
> circuits.
Oh really? I usually use the schematics to define the architecture or 
communicate about the architecture and fill in the working block later. 
But I guess that makes me special :-)
> I had only a short look at your page -- is my impression wrong that your
> general used font is smaller than the users default?
It should not be. I'll test it on an other machine later tonight.