Like someone else said though, if you think something that takes 20 seconds takes to long then I'd love to see you write a program that does the same thing faster.
I have a simple program which reads a bitstream
Is it a verifiable news? Is there a source code i can test?
Few people here suggested that I should abandon my life, spend three years writing an extremely efficient P&R software and post it here ...
I have a simple program which reads a bitstream
Is it a verificable news? Is there a source code i can test?
I never would have guessed calling Vivado "bloated" could be controversial. That is some serious Stockholm syndrome
Believe what you want. Writing a replacement is sufficiently complex that no one person or small team could realistically do it in a year, probably not a decade, even if they were sufficiently wealthy, altruistic, and provided full device models and bitstream documentation by Xilinx.
This is not meant as an attack on you, but none of that really answers my question. I suspect that nobody outside of Xilinx or Altera/Intel truly know what makes the software as big and slow as it actually is. It's easy to look at it from the outside and say it's slow and should be faster, but what I'm curious about is *why* it's slow, maybe it's perfectly reasonable given what it's doing, maybe it's not, but I'm not seeing any answers here, well other than someone else mentioning that it's mostly the models of all the different supported parts that take up space.
Send your CV to Xilinx, get hired and if you are so brilliant you will be paid for doing it.
Write your own
All the Xilinx stuff is mostly for free, and you don't pay a penny for it. So, why should you complain about?
Send your CV to Xilinx, get hired and if you are so brilliant you will be paid for doing it.
Xilinx and other vendors are not interested in "brilliant" software developers who can do stuff better than existing software. They are only interested in developers who can produce a shippable product with the least overall cost.
Worse, if you write software that works without issues for years, you're simply forgotten: out of sight, out of mind. Ask me how I know.
You'd think it'd matter to hardware vendors like Xilinx, but it doesn't. Only in smaller companies and startups do developers get to pick their tools. In larger companies, those tools are more often chosen by nontechnical higher-ups based on nontechnical reasons, and imposed on developers because such investments cannot be left for mere developers to decide. Developers soon grow a thick skin (or bail out to smaller companies or other fields, no matter how brilliant), and get on with the job with the tools at hand. Stockholm syndrome is common, be it compiler, OS, toolkit, dev environment, framework, or libraries, because eating shit every day is easier if you convince yourself that it tastes good.
Ignoring the above rant, the point is that software quality just does not matter at all in the corporate world. (There are exceptions, of course, but as usual, they're rare.)
What is the meaning of chattering in a forum that you are "supposed" to have improved the Xilinx' stuff, but you are not willing to release anything?!?
They spent a fortune to make all the openspace rooms more comfortable.
a lot of soundproof rooms, a tiny gym with ministepper machines, a kitchen induction cookers and several kinds of coffee machines, a lot of mini bars, and even a swimming pool.
but it's also done to attract brilliant person.
Worse, if you write software that works without issues for years, you're simply forgotten: out of sight, out of mind. Ask me how I know.how do you know it?
This kind of equipment need to work for years.
Send your CV to Xilinx, get hired and if you are so brilliant you will be paid for doing it.Xilinx and other vendors are not interested in "brilliant" software developers who can do stuff better than existing software.
They are only interested in developers who can produce a shippable product with the least overall cost.
Writing better software than is absolutely required is insubordination in todays corporate environments – at least if the higher ups or the marketing department find out.
Worse, if you write software that works without issues for years, you're simply forgotten: out of sight, out of mind. Ask me how I know.
You'd think it'd matter to hardware vendors like Xilinx, but it doesn't. Only in smaller companies and startups do developers get to pick their tools. In larger companies, those tools are more often chosen by nontechnical higher-ups based on nontechnical reasons, and imposed on developers because such investments cannot be left for mere developers to decide. Developers soon grow a thick skin (or bail out to smaller companies or other fields, no matter how brilliant), and get on with the job with the tools at hand. Stockholm syndrome is common, be it compiler, OS, toolkit, dev environment, framework, or libraries, because eating shit every day is easier if you convince yourself that it tastes good.
Ignoring the above rant, the point is that software quality just does not matter at all in the corporate world. (There are exceptions, of course, but as usual, they're rare.)
Send your CV to Xilinx, get hired and if you are so brilliant you will be paid for doing it.Xilinx and other vendors are not interested in "brilliant" software developers who can do stuff better than existing software.
They are only interested in developers who can produce a shippable product with the least overall cost.
I visited a Microsoft new building in Europe. They spent a fortune to make all the openspace rooms more comfortable. I saw a dozen of giant round tables with motorized flower pot in the center that goes up and down according to the purpose of the meeting, a lot of flowers and plants, a lot of soundproof rooms, a tiny gym with ministepper machines, a kitchen induction cookers and several kinds of coffee machines, a lot of mini bars, and even a swimming pool.
All in the same corporate building.
I think it's done to emprove the productivity, but it's also done to attract brilliant person.
Plus they have decades of legacy cruft, customer and partner workflows they want to preserve. They can release a new development environment or new system builder tools but rearchitecting the underlying technology would probably cost them customers rather than gain them.
Plus they have decades of legacy cruft, customer and partner workflows they want to preserve. They can release a new development environment or new system builder tools but rearchitecting the underlying technology would probably cost them customers rather than gain them.
Xilinx dropped ISE abruptly about 6 years ago and switched to Vivado. The move was so abrubt that only 2 chips are common between ISE and Vivado - Artix-7 100 and 200. This is a new development from scratch, not compatible to ISE. They said theis was a completely new design from scratch which took them 5 years to develop. That's a titanic effort, and Vivado has really good ideas. For example, FPGA editor is miles better than in ISE. So they are indeed trying hard. But still Vivado is bloated more than ISE and ISE generates better results.
If they want to attract (and retain) brilliant people, they should shift back to private offices instead of these trendy open space layouts that engineers almost universally hate.
If they want to attract (and retain) brilliant people, they should shift back to private offices instead of these trendy open space layouts that engineers almost universally hate.
Plus they have decades of legacy cruft, customer and partner workflows they want to preserve. They can release a new development environment or new system builder tools but rearchitecting the underlying technology would probably cost them customers rather than gain them.
Xilinx dropped ISE abruptly about 6 years ago and switched to Vivado. The move was so abrubt that only 2 chips are common between ISE and Vivado - Artix-7 100 and 200. This is a new development from scratch, not compatible to ISE. They said theis was a completely new design from scratch which took them 5 years to develop. That's a titanic effort, and Vivado has really good ideas. For example, FPGA editor is miles better than in ISE. So they are indeed trying hard. But still Vivado is bloated more than ISE and ISE generates better results.
Yep.
Note that this is mainly about all the user interface and additional GUI-based tools.
I'm pretty sure all the underlying synthesis, map, PAR tools, which AFAIK are just still command-line tools, are on the same code base and were not rewritten from scratch.
So sociologists and psychologists said.
Wow! That is like $15 worth of space if installed on an SSD, or maybe $2.50 is you use a HDD...