3
\$\begingroup\$

I am wondering why question: Free VerilogA simulators was closed. Especially with reason "not constructive". It:

a) Has an answer that can be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise. Friendly: program XYZ with home page ABC support VerilogA will be OK as an answer.

b) I cannot see how such question will solicit debate, argument, or extended discussion.

The only reason I can see is "can solicit polling". But then all questions that have more than one correct answer should be closed. What will left is only stupid academic test question that by design have one correct answer.

Examples of similar questions:

Free RF Simulation Software
Generic free Verilog synthesis tools?
Free circuit simulator for educational purposes

\$\endgroup\$

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3
\$\begingroup\$

Personally, I am on the fence about questions like these. They have value to the community, but then they also are something that needs to be maintained. They have the following undesirable traits:

  • They are like the "what is the best book for ..." questions, where everyone chips in with their favorite book. These questions are sometimes tolerated in the SE community. Due to the selectivity of this question, I don't think a huge list would be an issue, but then it leads to the next problem...
  • The list can change over time. Who knows, maybe the Falstad simulator will incorporate a VerilogA interpreter (unlikely). Software recommendations are tricky because they WILL change over time, and that's undesirable in an answer.
  • Despite the fact that OP asked for a "free" simulator, it's still fundamentally a shopping question. While we're more tolerant on shopping issues than most groups, I think it is further from the "good" side that we like.

These are the reasons I am not surprised that it got closed. Your examples may highlight an inconsistency in policy, but I think it's more an edge case than anything else.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ this is the type of thing stack-overflow would designate a "community wiki" but we don't have that... \$\endgroup\$
    – vicatcu
    Jul 10, 2012 at 4:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ @vicatcu, we have one for Verilog, it seems like this is a reproduction. I am open to reopening if there is some way it can be shown this is a very unique and extremely valuable question. When I saw this post I thought I might have err'ed(which you have to risk to take action, luckily the cost of a fault is small, all actions can be undone) but no one is voting to reopen. \$\endgroup\$
    – Kortuk
    Jul 11, 2012 at 8:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ Changeability over time is a problem for almost all our answers. If someone recommends a particular part number for some circuit, who's to say next year that part won't be obsolete, or that next year there won't be a better part available... \$\endgroup\$
    – The Photon
    Jul 13, 2012 at 20:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk Verilog A is practically a different beast from plain Verilog. You would be more likely to see VerilogA in a analog simulator (SPICE) and Verilog in a digital simulator. \$\endgroup\$
    – W5VO
    Jul 13, 2012 at 22:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .