Jump to content

Talk:Simple programmable logic device

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To 'not merge as proposed (no support; with objections); no consensus for alternative proposals, with discussion stale for 10months; Programmable logic device is the current overview article. Klbrain (talk) 18:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging Programmable array logic, Programmable logic array and Generic array logic into Simple programmable logic device. The devices in question are similar enough that I think they could be described in the same article without length issues, and as is the articles repeat much of the same information. Frankplow (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Comment against the proposal to merge

[edit]

Out of respect for the history of the devices, those who made them, those who may be looking for information about them, and the large amount of work that would be required to carry out such a project, I disagree with the proposal to merge the articles. Besides, there is already an overview article (Programmable logic device) which includes content out of the above referenced pages. It might make more sense to merge this page into the existing overview than to force the re-write of a whole bunch of other content (including that overview), if any change is to be made at all.

Rvnphnx (talk) 02:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

[edit]

Many college digital electronics books have tended to migrate covering SPLD/CPLD less and less over time towards Verilog/VHDL for FPGAs. Histroically speaking, we need to be careful to not delete content for older types of devices. Instead, we should be trying harder to expanding articles about older technology to ensure future readers have a place to learn about such topics!! The "Programmable Array Logic" contains much useuful information that shouldn't be deleted! On the other hand, I agree that we may need to do something, but we need to be very careful to make sure we don't lose great content. • SbmeirowTalk10:21, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.