New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Expand semantics of Array from MutableSequence to MutableMapping #73
Comments
Comment by whitequark The most idiomatic way to do this is to make the |
Comment by whitequark This is a self-contained feature that doesn't have backwards compatibility concerns, so it doesn't have to be in 0.1. |
I've never seen anyone express any interest in this feature, and it's not trivial to implement because of the highly special treatment of To implement this, |
This has been requested on the Aug 3rd meeting: https://freenode.irclog.whitequark.org/nmigen/2020-08-03#1596478574-1596478045; reopening since the reason for closing was that "seemingly no one wants this". |
This was reopened for the benefit of lkcl, who is no longer participating in the project. I think we can safely close this back as "no one (worth caring about) wants this". |
Issue by whitequark
Sunday May 12, 2019 at 13:25 GMT
Originally opened as m-labs/nmigen#66
An Array is essentially a mux, and there are several equally valid ways to drive a mux. Currently only straight binary is supported. It would be nice to also have one-hot and priority encodings, since all of these are trivially representable directly in RTLIL and Verilog.
One thing to note is that one-hot and priority are one and the same unless
parallel_case
is used.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: