Review of Guideline #25

Review of Guideline #25

Formatting

Item	Outcome
Guideline complies with the Guideline-Template	Yes
Name of guideline responsible with affiliation is clearly stated	Yes

Is the audience of the guideline correctly specified?

Yes.

Is the expertise required to write the guideline correctly specified?

It's missing.

Are the keywords well selected?

Yes. Maybe "streaming" would be appropriate as an additional keyword.

Are parts of the guideline too generic or too specific?

No.

Does the guideline explicitly refer to the handbook? To which part of the deliverable is it relevant (e.g., chapter of D1.2/D1.3)?

No.

Does the guideline specify the work done in the project that can benefit from the guideline?

No, though it could be guessed from the insights section and the author.

Other comments

1. Guideline advice:

2. Insights that led to the guideline:

3. Recommended implementation method of the guideline along with a solid motivation for the recommendation:

Great recommendation, favoring a streaming architecture is not necessarily something obvious.

4. Instantiation of the recommended implementation method in the reference platform:

It could be useful to explain the specifics of the use case that led to this guideline. A concrete example would help understanding and using the DATAFLOW pragma.

5. Evaluation of the guideline in reference applications:

6. References:

Could use a direct link to Xilinx documentation about DATAFLOW.

Track changes:

1. 30/07/2018: Made some formatting changes in the guidelines to cope with template.
2. 22/11/2018: guideline reviewed.