Re: Criticisms against Octave

[CdeMills]

Chipmuenk wrote
> 
> - I do know that there is and will be no "Octa-Link" (which is not a great
> loss IMHO) but I also don't think that it is absolutely necessary for FPGA
> DSP design. A combination of some high level DSP (using Octave) and freely
> (although not open source) available software and design blocks by the
> FPGA vendors combined with some stimulus generation and postprocessing
> (Octave once more) should do the job, at least I've done similar things in
> an industrial environment a few years ago.
> 

AFAIK, FPGA design tools are only available from FPGA vendors, there's no
open source version. Wouldn't the maintenance of such setup be complicated ?
I guess each new release would introduce some changes in the interfaces that
we, with limited time and ressources, would have to rush to adapt ?

Regards

Pascal 


--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Criticisms-against-Octave-tp4359058p4362898.html
Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.