<polysci_00232[m]>
Is it safe to call wiring.connect() inside a control flow block? I would expect it would just behave the same as having a large block of combinational assignments inside control flow.
<whitequark[cis]>
correct
<whitequark[cis]>
safe, and an intended use of it
<whitequark[cis]>
this is why the design makes it impossible for you to do e.g. m.d.sync += wiring.connect(), requiring you to pass m
<polysci_00232[m]>
ok just wanted to confirm because I recently fixed a bug in my own code that seemed to be stemming from strange behavior of wiring.connect(). I havent had the time to try and reproduce it but might be filing an issue when I get a chance
<whitequark[cis]>
that's interesting--how'd it look like?
<tpw_rules>
i use it (seemingly) safely in a control block in my design
<whitequark[cis]>
so unless you also had the directions wrong on both sides and the connect was a no-op (which is iirc a warning) that's an if controlling itself
<whitequark[cis]>
which is illegal
<polysci_00232[m]>
yea certainly looks like it. I dont remember seeing any warnings so ill try and reproduce and then see if I have more to share about the issue or if it was just me being dumb
<Wanda[cis]>
.... yeaaaah the warning is a TODO
<Wanda[cis]>
(soon)
<Wanda[cis]>
(well, not warning, hard error)
<Wanda[cis]>
Catherine: actually should I make an issue about moving stuff to `amaranth.errors`?
<whitequark[cis]>
Wanda: I don't think it's a concrete enough plan to act on it for now
<Wanda[cis]>
seems somewhat straightforward?
<Wanda[cis]>
... does this need an RFC
<Wanda[cis]>
but yeah not very important
<mcc111[m]>
<Wanda[cis]> "(on 52)" <- Oh. Uh, sorry, late response. My opinion is that I like the API in the RFC better than any of the "bikeshed" alternatives, because although it is a *little* ungainly it makes it a lot easier than any of the alternatives to build up an expression in stages/procedurally , and I like doing that.
<mcc111[m]>
To clarify, when you call .case() that returns a new value, right?
jn has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
jn has joined #amaranth-lang
<whitequark[cis]>
yes
<Wanda[cis]>
yeah, the problem with it is that it requires a finishing as_value() in some circumstances but not all, because it has to be a ValueCastable, not a Value
<whitequark[cis]>
we can teach the syntax with a finishing .as_value() at the end
<whitequark[cis]>
as the only way to use it
<whitequark[cis]>
sure, it'll sometimes work without too, but if it doesn't there's an easy fix
<_whitenotifier-6>
[amaranth-lang/amaranth-lang.github.io] github-merge-queue[bot] 8fb2e89 - Deploying to main from @ amaranth-lang/amaranth@0c041f2602e7e424079560b4100074f79afe10a4 🚀
<key2>
File "...python3.10/site-packages/amaranth_stdio/serial.py", line 91, in __init__
<tpw_rules>
whitequark[cis]: i had thought about asking for this quirk to be backported too, perhaps without a warning, but in my mind that's a bit of a slippery slope. i had hoped to keep using amaranth-soc on stable amaranth
<tpw_rules>
it seems we are on a good track to 0.5 though so perhaps i just have to be patient for another month or two
<whitequark[cis]>
I would definitely not spend my own time on backporting that quirk
<key2>
fixed thx
<cr1901>
I've already dealt with amaranth-soc breaking on stable amaranth due to how pdm decides whether deps are satisfiable. Sentinel won't get a PyPI release until amaranth-soc 0.1 (whenever that is)
<Wanda[cis]>
regarding next monday: it seems it's a religious holiday in a bunch of countries, is it going to be rescheduled?
<cr1901>
.oO (April Fools RFCs)
<tpw_rules>
oh that is in fact easter monda
<tpw_rules>
t
<tpw_rules>
y
<tpw_rules>
>_>
<whitequark[cis]>
<Wanda[cis]> "regarding next monday: it..." <- uhhh, good question actually
<whitequark[cis]>
yes, it's a bank holiday in the UK, so everyone who works at CF (me, JF, Staf) are going to be off the clock
<_whitenotifier-6>
[amaranth-lang/amaranth-lang.github.io] github-merge-queue[bot] a5d94bf - Deploying to main from @ amaranth-lang/amaranth@738d8b7764911af9982365cc59c512e330eb75a4 🚀
<_whitenotifier-5>
[amaranth-lang/amaranth-lang.github.io] github-merge-queue[bot] 31a4236 - Deploying to main from @ amaranth-lang/amaranth@f261071f7cded39fad56381eed5ea0bda5e6be14 🚀
<_whitenotifier-5>
[amaranth-lang/amaranth-lang.github.io] github-merge-queue[bot] dedc828 - Deploying to main from @ amaranth-lang/amaranth-soc@8b1de15973edf51ebe4d5c86a1c9704b17578483 🚀