CλaSH – From Haskell to Hardware
Disclaimer: I haven't read through the details of the language yet.<p>> <i>The merits of using a functional language to describe hardware comes from the fact that combinational circuits can be directly modeled as mathematical functions and that functional languages lend themselves very well at describing and (de-)composing mathematical functions.</i><p>Whenever I read something like this, I cannot really take the language or the language designer seriously. The complexity and difficulty of hardware design is not in the <i>combinational</i> part, it's in the <i>sequential</i> (i.e., state-carrying) part of the circuit [1]. One of the major drawbacks of Verilog, SystemVerilog, and VHDL, is that successive sequential statements have to be translated manually to state machines (at least for synthesizable code – simulation code does not suffer from this restriction) [2].<p>[1] Source: I'm an FPGA design engineer with a computer science background.<p>[2] There are of course languages with an improved design, but nearly all of them are research prototypes and unsuited for non-toy/example designs. The more innovative commercial products have hardly any marketshare, because electrical engineers seem to be extremely conservative [1].