Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inconsistency with Decoupled and DecoupledIO #2436

Open
mwachs5 opened this issue Mar 7, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Inconsistency with Decoupled and DecoupledIO #2436

mwachs5 opened this issue Mar 7, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
good first issue An issue whose fix is simple. Perfect for a new developer wanting to get involved!

Comments

@mwachs5
Copy link
Contributor

mwachs5 commented Mar 7, 2022

It's a source of confusion when to use Decoupled and when to use DecoupledIO -- can we just make them the same name and deprecate the inconsistent name?

Type of issue: feature request

Impact: API modification

Development Phase: request

Other information

If the current behavior is a bug, please provide the steps to reproduce the problem:

No bug
What is the current behavior?

You use Decoupled to create the thing but DecoupledIO is the type. This is really confusing.

What is the expected behavior?

They could both just be called Decoupled. And DecoupledIO would alias to Decoupled but pop up as deprecated.

Please tell us about your environment:

What is the use case for changing the behavior?

Less cognitive load

@mwachs5 mwachs5 added the good first issue An issue whose fix is simple. Perfect for a new developer wanting to get involved! label Mar 7, 2022
@schoeberl
Copy link
Contributor

A better name would actually be ReadyValidIO. This is how it is called in textbooks (e.g., Dally). And when we are about renaming things. The data field should be called data and not bits.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue An issue whose fix is simple. Perfect for a new developer wanting to get involved!
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants