\section{Hardware description in Haskell}
- To translate Haskell to hardware, every Haskell construct needs a
- translation to \VHDL. There are often multiple valid translations
- possible. When faced with choices, the most obvious choice has been
- chosen wherever possible. In a lot of cases, when a programmer looks
- at a functional hardware description it is completely clear what
- hardware is described. We want our translator to generate exactly that
- hardware whenever possible, to make working with \CLaSH\ as intuitive as
- possible.
-
\subsection{Function application}
The basic syntactic elements of a functional program are functions
and function application. These have a single obvious \VHDL\
translation: each top level function becomes a hardware component,
where each argument is an input port and the result value is the
(single) output port. This output port can have a complex type (such
- as a tuple), so having just a single output port does not pose a
+ as a tuple), so having just a single output port does not create a
limitation.
Each function application in turn becomes component instantiation.
Here, the result of each argument expression is assigned to a
signal, which is mapped to the corresponding input port. The output
port of the function is also mapped to a signal, which is used as
- the result of the application.
+ the result of the application itself.
Since every top level function generates its own component, the
hierarchy of of function calls is reflected in the final \VHDL\
hardware. This separation in different components makes the
resulting \VHDL\ output easier to read and debug.
- \subsection{Choice}
- Although describing components and connections allows us to describe
- a lot of hardware designs already, there is an obvious thing
- missing: choice. We need some way to be able to choose between
- values based on another value. In Haskell, choice is achieved by
- \hs{case} expressions, \hs{if} expressions, pattern matching and
- guards.
-
- However, to be able to describe our hardware in a more convenient
- way, we also want to translate Haskell's choice mechanisms. The
- easiest of these are of course case expressions (and \hs{if}
+ Example that defines the \texttt{mac} function by applying the
+ \texttt{add} and \texttt{mul} functions to calculate $a * b + c$:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+mac a b c = add (mul a b) c
+\end{verbatim}
+
+ TODO: Pretty picture
+
+ \subsection{Choices }
+ Although describing components and connections allows describing a
+ lot of hardware designs already, there is an obvious thing missing:
+ choice. We need some way to be able to choose between values based
+ on another value. In Haskell, choice is achieved by \hs{case}
+ expressions, \hs{if} expressions, pattern matching and guards.
+
+ The easiest of these are of course case expressions (and \hs{if}
expressions, which can be very directly translated to \hs{case}
expressions). A \hs{case} expression can in turn simply be
- translated to a conditional assignment, where the conditions use
- equality comparisons against the constructors in the \hs{case}
- expressions.
+ translated to a conditional assignment in \VHDL, where the
+ conditions use equality comparisons against the constructors in the
+ \hs{case} expressions.
A slightly more complex (but very powerful) form of choice is
pattern matching. A function can be defined in multiple clauses,
where each clause specifies a pattern. When the arguments match the
pattern, the corresponding clause will be used.
+ A pattern match (with optional guards) can also be implemented using
+ conditional assignments in \VHDL, where the condition is the logical
+ and of comparison results of each part of the pattern as well as the
+ guard.
+
+ Contrived example that sums two values when they are equal or
+ non-equal (depending on the predicate given) and returns 0
+ otherwise. This shows three implementations, one using and if
+ expression, one using only case expressions and one using pattern
+ matching and guards.
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+sumif pred a b = if pred == Eq && a == b || pred == Neq && a != b
+ then a + b
+ else 0
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+sumif pred a b = case pred of
+ Eq -> case a == b of
+ True -> a + b
+ False -> 0
+ Neq -> case a != b of
+ True -> a + b
+ False -> 0
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+sumif Eq a b | a == b = a + b
+sumif Neq a b | a != b = a + b
+sumif _ _ _ = 0
+\end{verbatim}
+
+ TODO: Pretty picture
+
\subsection{Types}
Translation of two most basic functional concepts has been
discussed: function application and choice. Before looking further
projects / matthijs / master-project / dsd-paper.git / blobdiff