Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
07/05/06 04:38
Read: times


 
#119641 - Maybe you should do the basic work
Responding to: ???'s previous message
I'd recommend you learn the basics first.

Learn what a NAND gate is, and then learn how one would create all the other logic functions, flipflops, counters, registers, decoders, multiplexers, ALU's, etc, from that.

Learn about propagation delays, synchronous state machine design, asynchronous state machine design, races, metastability, etc, read a few books on hardware design. Go back and read them again.

When you feel you've learned enough to enable you to design a Pentium class processor without any published references, i.e. when you've memorized all the details on all the common digital devices, then, perhaps, you'll be ready to start your study of programmable logic. Until you've done those nominally ten years of work, FORGET ABOUT FPGA!

Visit the programmable logic manufacturers' web sites and read their downloadable documentation. Learn what kinds of tools you have to have and how to use them.

Learn the architectural differences between the various vendors' products and how you have to deal with those differences. Above all, be sure you understand enough about each vendor's device characteristics so that you'll be able to select the appropriate vendor. FPGA architectures and features are different from one another. It's not just like buying one or another microcontroller. Which architecture and feature set you select will severely impact the results you generate, as well the tools you use.

Learn about when it's appropriate to use CPLD and when to use FPGA.

Learn the characteristics of the vendor-supplied tools. You won't get far along if you don't know what the tools do for you.

Along the way, if you live that long, perhaps you'll learn about how one programs these devices.

Don't worry about logic reduction tools like Karnaugh maps, truth tables, and Quine-McCluskey, as the software tools always do the logic reduction for you, and, if you express logic in some obtuse way, in order to effect a reduction, you may not get the results you desire. Don't be stingy with your comments and other text in your hardware descriptions.

Also, don't ask someone else to do your work for you, particularly your brain work. You'll never learn this stuff until you do the work.

RE


List of 15 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
FPGA's            01/01/70 00:00      
   re: FPGAs            01/01/70 00:00      
      Re:FPGA            01/01/70 00:00      
         FPGAs            01/01/70 00:00      
            re: FPGAs            01/01/70 00:00      
               re: FPGA            01/01/70 00:00      
                  re: FPGAs            01/01/70 00:00      
                     reply            01/01/70 00:00      
         re: FPGAs            01/01/70 00:00      
   Maybe you should do the basic work            01/01/70 00:00      
      Hello Richard,            01/01/70 00:00      
   study Mr. Boole, then            01/01/70 00:00      
      I don't think so ...            01/01/70 00:00      
         Taken out of context, i would make no su            01/01/70 00:00      
   A good thing would be            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List