Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for Integer properties and conversion to FIRRTL. #3469

Closed

Conversation

mikeurbach
Copy link
Contributor

Contributor Checklist

  • Did you add Scaladoc to every public function/method?
  • Did you add at least one test demonstrating the PR?
  • Did you delete any extraneous printlns/debugging code?
  • Did you specify the type of improvement?
  • Did you add appropriate documentation in docs/src?
  • Did you request a desired merge strategy?
  • Did you add text to be included in the Release Notes for this change?

Type of Improvement

  • Feature (or new API)

Desired Merge Strategy

  • Squash: The PR will be squashed and merged (choose this if you have no preference).

Release Notes

The Integer property type is defined in FIRRTL spec version 3.1.0: https://github.com/chipsalliance/firrtl-spec/releases/tag/v3.1.0.

Reviewer Checklist (only modified by reviewer)

  • Did you add the appropriate labels? (Select the most appropriate one based on the "Type of Improvement")
  • Did you mark the proper milestone (Bug fix: 3.5.x, 3.6.x, or 5.x depending on impact, API modification or big change: 6.0)?
  • Did you review?
  • Did you check whether all relevant Contributor checkboxes have been checked?
  • Did you do one of the following when ready to merge:
    • Squash: You/ the contributor Enable auto-merge (squash), clean up the commit message, and label with Please Merge.
    • Merge: Ensure that contributor has cleaned up their commit history, then merge with Create a merge commit.

@@ -373,6 +375,9 @@ private[chisel3] object Converter {
else
extractType(t._elements.head._2, childClearDir, info, checkProbe, true)
}
case t: Property[_] if t.tpe =:= typeOf[Int] => fir.IntegerPropertyType
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the type tag for how it avoids boilerplate, but it is also a little more loosey goosey. I opened an alternative PR that I actually kind of prefer: #3470.

@mikeurbach
Copy link
Contributor Author

We will go with the other approach.

@mikeurbach mikeurbach closed this Aug 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant