[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [N8VEM-S100:3128] Re: GAL's and PALASM

On 4/20/2014 11:54 AM, John Monahan wrote:
Hi Neil,

Good luck with the VP390.  I’ll be curious to see if you can burn the
Atmel AFT22V10 GAL’s and if you have to set the GAL type to National
Semiconductor rather than Lattice.

With the changes I described however I have had no problems burning
Lattice 22V10’s.

On the software side I’m running into a curious issue.

I would like to use “(“ and “)” brackets  in some of my equations  as
PALASM allows that.  However the PALASM4 program always comes up with
error X10003

“Please run Minimize (Minimize Boolean)”

However if I set “Y” for “Minimize Boolean” in the Compilation Options,
  the compile does not give an error but no .JED file is written.

An example would be:-

mA0       =      (mBE0 + /mBE1 * /mBE2)
                      +  mBE0 * /mBE1 *  mBE2
                      +  mBE0 *  mBE1 *  mBE2

Do you get the same thing?

This equation is the same as:

mA0 =  mBE0
    + /mBE1 * /mBE2
    +  mBE0 * /mBE1 * mBE2 -- redundant
    +  mBE0 *  mBE1 * mBE2 -- redundant

or equivalently:

mA0 =  mBE0
    + /mBE1 * /mBE2

Was that your intent? The parenthesis seem superfluous.

The last two terms are redundant. When mBE0 is asserted, mBE1 and mBE2
don't matter. When mBE0 is negated, mBE1 and mBE2 don't matter either.
The optimizer will surely notice that.

I used PALASM for years and never used parenthesis. I'm not sure if
PALASM is doing something weird with your example.