Upcoming Changes to SVUnit

After some back-and-forth with SVUnit users over the last several months, I reckon it’s finally time to get rid of the make user interface. Turns out, the incremental construction of the framework that make helped with isn’t all that necessary. It also seems some hardware developers get a little nervous around makefiles (admittedly, they make me nervous at times). In response, I’ll be putting together a simpler build/run script in place of what’s there now.

If you’re in favour of a new scripting interface and would like to help out by critiquing a first release, please let me know at neil.johnson@agilesoc.com.

I have unit tests for the scripting to rely on for quality so what I end up with should be pretty solid. Still, it’d be nice for me to get a few opinions before I release it.


About nosnhojn

I've been working in ASIC and FPGA development for more than 13 years at various IP and product development companies and now as a consultant with XtremeEDA Corp. In 2008 I took an interest in agile software development. I've found a massive amount of material out there related to agile development, all of it is interesting and most of it is applicable to hardware development in one form or another. So I'm here to find what agile concepts will work for hardware development and to help other developers use them successfully. I've been fortunate to have the chance to speak about agile hardware development at various conferences like Agile2011, Agile2012, Intel Lean/Agile Conference 2013 and SNUG. I also do lunch-n-learn talks for small groups and enjoy talking to anyone with an agile hardware story to tell! You can find me at neil.johnson@agilesoc.com.
This entry was posted in Functional Verification and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Upcoming Changes to SVUnit

  1. Tudor says:

    I never really got why people get put off so easily by make. Granted, HDL/HVL compilers these days tend to support incremental compile out of the box, so there’s no need for make to do those things. My only fear is that with a script based solution we will lose some of the ability to customize how the build/run gets done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *