I've found that SpinalHDL has some powerful and elegant ways to describe a rather complicated fsm. I wonder if it's possible to construct a FSM lib (like SpinalHDL has done) in Chisel?
p.s. I'm not very familiar with scala.😶🌫️
Chisel does not currently have a FSM library. We normally write state machines explicitly using a ChiselEnum for the state register.
If you like the API that Spinal has, but need/want to use Chisel, it should not be to hard to make a similar API on top of Chisel. Chisel is designed to allow you to add your own favorite abstractions by adding your own Scala library code.
Related
Basically I would like to start hacking on the internals of Chisel/FIRRTL. It would help if someone could point me to where I could start looking at.
I have been reading through the source code. I so far understand that Chisel has been implemented as Scala library. Each Chisel object has some methods for emitting FIRRTL. After a particular Scala program is run, the objects are traversed and FIRRTL is generated.
What I wanted to know is if I have been looking in the right direction. I still haven't figured where the AST formation for the Chisel modules and the type inference happens. Eventually I will get there, but it would be great if someone could summarize to me places that I should look.
Of course, this is too much of an ask from the Chisel developers, but even some basic information would help!
I'd say there are two basic places to start.
Firrtl is a good start because it's newer than chisel and overall the code base is newer. Firrtl is a parser, transforms and emitters, and those are pretty straightforward. The transforms encapsulate most operations quite nicely
Chisel as an EDSL is much more complicated and quirky. The place to start is in chiselFrontend. The Builder class is the root of the magic for constructing the internal graph that is used to emit chirrtl/high-firrtl. It uses a dynamic variable to provide a place where modules and their components register their creation and connections to the graph.
Hope that helps you get started, happy sleuthing
I want a simple timeline component (like in video editing software) for a clojure/seesaw app and I am wondering if it is a good approach to implement this directly with clojure and seesaw or if I should write it in java and make my clojure wrapper around it.
Or more generally: is a functional programming language optimal for writing UI widgets? I cannot imagine doing that without a lot of state involved. And wasn't OO invented for UI-development in the first place?
You could go either way. On Overtone, we've built a number of custom graphical components directly in Clojure with Seesaw. Many times, an atom and (seesaw.core/canvas) is sufficient for this kind of thing.
Depending on how fancy you're going to get, one reason to do it in Clojure is you can extend Seesaw's protocols (selection, binding, etc) to the new widget so it works seamlessly with Seesaw. Another consideration is whether your widget needs to make use of Clojure data from other parts of the app. This will be much cleaner from Clojure than Java.
That said, if you're comfortable in Swing/Java, you can do it there and Seesaw will be perfectly happy to work with a custom widget built in Java. Good luck!
FP is good for doing UI programming but for that the underlying UI framework should also be based on FP concepts like FRP etc. In your case the underlying UI framework (Swing) is OO based and hence it would be more easy to implement it in Java but you can still do it in seesaw.
All else being equal (i.e. assuming you know both Clojure and Java), I would probably write this as a custom Swing component in Java.
Reasons:
Swing is fundamentally a Java-based OOP framework and is a better fit with Java in terms of paradigm
Mutable state is easier in Java than in Clojure
If you write it in Java, you can use it elsewhere more easily (e.g. as a library from other Java code)
It's easy to wrap a Swing component in Clojure after you have created it
Of course, for the application logic itself I would certainly prefer Clojure.
There are several packages out there that help in automating the task of writing bindings between C\C++ and other languages.
In my case, I'd like to bind Python, some options for such packages are: SWIG, Boost.Python and Robin.
It seems that the straight forward process is to use these packages to create C\C++ linkable libraries (with mostly static functions) and have the higher language be extended using them.
However, my situation is that I already have a developed working system in C++ therefore plan to embed Python into it so that future development will be in Python.
It's not clear to me how, and if at all possible, to use these packages in helping to extend embedded Python in such a way that the Python code would be able to interact with the various Singleton instances already running in the system, and instantiate C++ classes and interact with them.
What I'm looking for is an insight regarding the design best fitted for this situation.
Boost.python lets you do a lot of those things right out of the box, especially if you use smart pointers. You can even inherit from C++ classes in Python, then pass instances of those back to your C++ code and have everything still work. My favorite resource on how to do various stuff is this (especially check out the "How To" section): http://wiki.python.org/moin/boost.python/ .
Boost.python is especially good if you're using smart pointers or intrusive pointers, as those translate transparently into PyObject reference counting. Also, it's very good at making factory functions look like Python constructors, which makes for very clean Python APIs.
If you're not using smart pointers, it's still possible to do all the things you want, but you have to mess with various return and lifetime policies, which can give you a headache.
To make it short: There is the modern alternative pybind11.
Long version: I also had to embed python. The C++ Python interface is small so I decided to use the C Api. That turned out to be a nightmare. Exposing classes lets you write tons of complicated boilerplate code. Boost::Python greatly avoids this by using readable interface definitions. However I found that boost lacks a sophisticated documentation and dor some things you still have to call the Python api. Further their build system seems to give people troubles. I cant tell since i use packages provided by the system. Finally I tried the boost python fork pybind11 and have to say that it is really convenient and fixes some shortcomings of boost like the necessity of the use of the Python Api, ability to use lambdas, the lack of an easy comprehensible documentation and automatic exception translation. Further it is header only and does not pull the huge boost dependency on deployment, so I can definitively recommend it.
I just started using clojure today (however , I have used Java a lot and know of functional paradigms) and I was wondering if it was a good idea to build a clojure app with a reasonable complex interface (dragging, dropping, panning, zooming,...) using Swing?
I can imagine that a lot of the normal swing logics (especially concerning OO) has to be bypassed one way or the other..
I asume that all is possible , but is it possible in a way that justifyable?
I mean wouldn't it be like hitting a nail with a screwdriver in stead of with a hammer?
Has anyone here have experience in building GUI's with Clojure (and of Course : is Swing the ideal candidate for that?)
Thanks !
I've found it relatively easy to use Swing to build decent user interfaces in Clojure. You have a couple of options about how to do it however:
Write the code pretty much as you would in Java, just using the Java interop from Clojure to call the relevant Swing APIs. This article does a good job of explaining how, with a bit of macro magic as well to make your life easier.
Use a Clojure GUI wrapper for Swing, e.g. seesaw or clj-swing. My take is that these tools have the potential to help you write some really neat GUI code in idiomatic Clojure
One really cool feature of Clojure's software transactional memory subsystem is that it allows you to set watches on variables: whenever the variable is changed (by anything), your callback gets executed. This lends itself to a powerful sort of GUI programming where the GUI updates itself automagically based on the state of your variables.
A short but non-trivial Swing GUI example is described in detail at http://www.paullegato.com/blog/swing-clojure-gui-black-scholes/ .
Since others are mentioning swing related answers, I'll ask you one question: Is Swing a requirement. Although writing Swing code in clojure is more pleasant then in Java, it is still Swing, with all its verbosity and annoyances, especially in complex application with hard set requirements.
Have you considered web UI, where Clojure fits much more natural? Or SWT or QT Jambi, which also can be made to work using Clojure.
I'm creating a game in XNA and was thinking of creating my own scripting language (extremely simple mind you). I know there's better ways to go about this (and that I'm reinventing the wheel), but I want the learning experience more than to be productive and fast.
When confronted with code at run time, from what I understand, the usual approach is to parse into a machine code or byte code or something else that is actually executable and then execute that, right? But, for instance, when Chrome first came out they said their JavaScript engine was fast because it compiles the JavaScript into machine code. This implies other engines weren't compiling into machine code.
I'd prefer not compiling to a lower language, so are there any known modern techniques for parsing and executing code without compiling to low level? Perhaps something like parsing the code into some sort of tree, branching through the tree, and comparing each symbol and calling some function that handles that symbol? (Wild guessing and stabbing in the dark)
I personally wouldn't roll your own parser ( turning the input into tokens ) or lexer ( checking the input tokens for your language grammar ). Take a look at ANTLR for parsing/lexing - it's a great framework and has full source code if you want to dig into the guts of it.
For executing code that you've parsed, I'd look at running a simple virtual machine or even better look at llvm which is an open-source(ish) attempt to standardise the virtual machine byte code format and provide nice features like JITing ( turning your script compiled byte code into assembly ).
I wouldn't discourage you from the more advanced options that you machine such as native machine code execution but bear in mind that this is a very specialist area and gets real complex, real fast!
Earlz pointed out that my reply might seem to imply 'don't bother doing this yourself. Re-reading my post it does sound a bit that way. The reason I mentioned ANTLR and LLVM is they both have heaps of source code and tutorials so I feel this is a good reference source. Take it as a base and play
You can try this framework for building languages (it works well with XNA):
http://www.meta-alternative.net/mbase.html
There are some tutorials:
http://www.meta-alternative.net/calc.pdf
http://www.meta-alternative.net/pfront.pdf
Python is great as a scripting language. I would recommend you make a C# binding for its C API and use that. Embedding Python is easy. Your application can define functions, types/classes and variables inside modules which the Python interpreter can access. The application can also call functions in Python scripts and get a result back. These two features combined gives you a two-way communication scheme.
Basically, you get the Python syntax and semantics for free. What you would need to implement is the API your application exposes to Python. An example could be access to game logic functions and render functions. Python scripts would then define functions which calls these, and the host application would invoke the Python functions (with parameters) to get work done.
EDIT: Seems like IronPython can save you even more work. It's a C# implementation of CPython, and has its own embedding API: http://www.ironpython.net/