Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > VHDL > Programming Altera Devices

Reply
Thread Tools

Programming Altera Devices

 
 
ALuPin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-28-2004
Hi newsgroup users,

can someone tell me how to define the programming time of a EP1C12 Cyclone
when using PL-BYTEBLASTER2 cable in comparison to PL-USB-BLASTER cable?

Thank you for your help.


Rgds
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tim Hubberstey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-28-2004
ALuPin wrote:
> can someone tell me how to define the programming time of a EP1C12 Cyclone
> when using PL-BYTEBLASTER2 cable in comparison to PL-USB-BLASTER cable?


Wrong newsgroup, try comp.arch.fpga.
--
Tim Hubberstey, P.Eng. . . . . . Hardware/Software Consulting Engineer
Marmot Engineering . . . . . . . VHDL, ASICs, FPGAs, embedded systems
Vancouver, BC, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.marmot-eng.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ALuPin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-29-2004
Tim Hubberstey <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<e0YDc.29232$E84.16282@edtnps89>...
> ALuPin wrote:
> > can someone tell me how to define the programming time of a EP1C12 Cyclone
> > when using PL-BYTEBLASTER2 cable in comparison to PL-USB-BLASTER cable?

>


Wrong newsgroup? Why?
Does describing hardware not mean programming it sooner or later?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tim Hubberstey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-29-2004
ALuPin wrote:
> Tim Hubberstey <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<e0YDc.29232$E84.16282@edtnps89>...
>
>>ALuPin wrote:
>>
>>>can someone tell me how to define the programming time of a EP1C12 Cyclone
>>>when using PL-BYTEBLASTER2 cable in comparison to PL-USB-BLASTER cable?

>>

>
> Wrong newsgroup? Why?


First, because this group is for discussing the VHDL language and tools
directly related to the language. Check the FAQs for the charter (
http://www.eda.org/comp.lang.vhdl ). Details of programming hardware
does not fall under this definition, IMO. If all questions were
appropriate for all newsgroups, there would be no reason to have
anything other than one giant group instead of the hierarchy of groups
that does exist.

Second, because, presumably, you want an answer to your question.
comp.arch.fpga is a better venue for getting an answer because you have
a broader base of people who are specifically interested in FPGAs.

> Does describing hardware not mean programming it sooner or later?


Actually, no it doesn't. FPGA/CPLD devices are only a subset of the
hardware developed using VHDL. I have written thousands of lines of VHDL
(for ASICs) that have never passed through any kind of programmer. And
then there's the 60% of the total code that is used for verification
that isn't even synthesizable.
--
Tim Hubberstey, P.Eng. . . . . . Hardware/Software Consulting Engineer
Marmot Engineering . . . . . . . VHDL, ASICs, FPGAs, embedded systems
Vancouver, BC, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.marmot-eng.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
ALuPin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-29-2004
> First, because this group is for discussing the VHDL language and tools
> directly related to the language. Check the FAQs for the charter (
> http://www.eda.org/comp.lang.vhdl ). Details of programming hardware
> does not fall under this definition, IMO. If all questions were
> appropriate for all newsgroups, there would be no reason to have
> anything other than one giant group instead of the hierarchy of groups
> that does exist.

I have seen a lot of persons asking in comp.arch.fpga and
comp.lang.vhdl
I experienced that these two newsgroups offer a better complete answer to me,
sometimes the one, sometimes the other - even in regard with
FPGA specific questions.
>
> Second, because, presumably, you want an answer to your question.

Yes of course, but I did not get it in 'comp.arch.fpga' yet.
> comp.arch.fpga is a better venue for getting an answer because you have
> a broader base of people who are specifically interested in FPGAs.
>
> > Does describing hardware not mean programming it sooner or later?

>
> Actually, no it doesn't. FPGA/CPLD devices are only a subset of the
> hardware developed using VHDL. I have written thousands of lines of VHDL
> (for ASICs) that have never passed through any kind of programmer. And
> then there's the 60% of the total code that is used for verification
> that isn't even synthesizable.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Template for programming devices b.moshiko@gmail.com VHDL 0 08-23-2009 11:09 AM
equivalent Xilinx FPGA for Altera Stratix II GX-60 ,Altera StratixII GX-90 chaitu VHDL 1 01-28-2008 12:46 PM
Can security devices harm DVDs and electronic devices? curious@nospam.com DVD Video 12 03-02-2005 06:57 AM
"Windows CE Devices and Palm Devices Help Needed" Naveen Vaila ASP .Net Mobile 1 06-23-2004 10:12 AM
Altera to Xilinx Ronny Hengst VHDL 1 07-24-2003 05:05 PM



Advertisments