[Discussion] What is the future of ChiselVerify? about chiselverify HOT 3 OPEN

Thanks for raising this question. I honestly don't feel qualified to say much here, though, since I haven't been following the development of Chisel and CIRCT as closely for the last two years as I did before then.

What would you suggest, @schoeberl?

from chiselverify.

Good to start a discussion here. I think it should evolve to provide a compatibility layer for ChiselTest API on top of the new Chisel simulation framework. Then it should evolve towards UVM like features and be a better solution than cocotb and PyUVM for Chisel, but also general Verilog designs.

from chiselverify.

Good to start a discussion here. I think it should evolve to provide a compatibility layer for ChiselTest API on top of the new Chisel simulation framework. Then it should evolve towards UVM like features and be a better solution than cocotb and PyUVM for Chisel, but also general Verilog designs.

Interesting take @schoeberl , I agree that this would be a good route to take to improve the attractiveness of the library. I can start by taking a look internally with the arcilator people to see if/how we can gain access to a peek-poke-step style interface again, then it would be a question of how and if we would want to hook into verilator. I'll keep this issue up-to-date with what I find!

from chiselverify.