Two-level semantics and code generation
Theoretical Computer Science - First European Symposium on Programming, Saarbru:9Aicken, W. Germany, March 17:8
LFP '86 Proceedings of the 1986 ACM conference on LISP and functional programming
Multistage programming: its theory and applications
Multistage programming: its theory and applications
Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Generative programming and component engineering
A methodology for generating verified combinatorial circuits
Proceedings of the 4th ACM international conference on Embedded software
Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGPLAN workshop on Partial evaluation and program manipulation
Lightweight modular staging: a pragmatic approach to runtime code generation and compiled DSLs
GPCE '10 Proceedings of the ninth international conference on Generative programming and component engineering
Static consistency checking for Verilog wire interconnects
Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation
Type-specialized staged programming with process separation
Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Modern hardware description languages support code-generation constructs like generate/endgenerate in Verilog. These constructs are intended to describe regular or parameterized hardware designs and, when used effectively, can make hardware descriptions shorter, more understandable, and more reusable. In practice, however, designers avoid these constructs because it is difficult to understand and predict the properties of the generated code. Is the generated code even type safe? Is it synthesizable? What physical resources (e.g. combinatorial gates and flip-flops) does it require? It is often impossible to answer these questions without first generating the fully-expanded code. In the Verilog and VHDL communities, this generation process is referred to as elaboration. This paper proposes a disciplined approach to elaboration in Verilog. By viewing Verilog as a statically typed two-level language, we are able to reflect the distinction between values that are known at elaboration time and values that are part of the circuit computation. This distinction is crucial for determining whether abstractions such as iteration and module parameters are used in a synthesizable manner. To illustrate this idea, we develop a core calculus for Verilog that we call Featherweight Verilog (FV) and an associated static type system. We formally define a preprocessing step analogous to the elaboration phase of Verilog, and the kinds of errors that can occur during this phase. Finally, we show that a well-typed design cannot cause preprocessing errors, and that the result of its expansion is always a synthesizable circuit.