Honored Contributor
Honored ContributorThe statement below is not generaly true. The hardware description will be more concise than the schematics. If written well it will also document the design well.
--- Quote Start --- Those (several A3 pages long schematic designs) sound like the equivalent of a program consisting of just one function of several thousand lines long. --- Quote End --- Usually you will get a pile of A3 pages of schematics for "one function of several thousand lines long". I think you do not mean a "function" but a "module" or an "architecture". --- Quote Start --- The summary/consensus which I seem to hear here is that parameterisation support in schematics is bad to non-existent, and that there is no consistent schematic-fileformat with which to exchange designs between tools/vendors. --- Quote End --- This is true. There has however been work on defining schematics in iterative and recursive ways in academia. But only the simple busses have survived the real world of electronics design. --- Quote Start --- Other than that, navigating and/or visualising a properly hierarchical/modular schematic design (possibly using HDL in some/all of the leaf-modules) would be better than using straight HDL only. --- Quote End --- In the assumption of well written HDL I do disagree. Schematics get very complex at some time and can be hard to draw and update for complex systems. Well drawn schematics take much more time to make and maintain. In any case you can always generate schematics from your HDL e.g. by Quartus II tools such as RTL-viewer
