Talk:Electronic system-level design and verification

Untitled
This paragraph was apparently copied verbatim from What do we do? just modifiy it enough so it's not plagaristic? (I guess the Author could the same person who started the article) Danny Beardsley 19:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I am the author of this verbiage, although I did not post it on Wikipedia and I don't know who did. The verbiage was part of an article called "ESL Design State of the Union 2005" that I wrote in February 2005 for publication at the DATE 2005 conference. The verbiage on Wikipedia was repeated without my knowledge by the authors of a new ESL book (info at http://www.electronicsystemlevel.com) to which I was also a contributor. So, one could seriously argue that in the web world, what goes around, comes around. Bmurrayca 19:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Minor correction: I am the author of some of the verbiage in the original paragraph. The (anon) poster adapted that verbiage. Bmurrayca 19:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Definition dries paint
The opening para of lead concludes as follows:

It is defined in ESL Design and Verification as: "the utilization of appropriate abstractions in order to increase comprehension about a system, and to enhance the probability of a successful implementation of functionality in a cost-effective manner."

I'm (not) sorry to state this so directly, but that prose passage pretty much belongs to the encyclopedia of bloviation.

It contributes no useful understanding, and generally imbues the reader with a strong impulse to browse elsewhere, reading nothing further in this fine article. Is that our goal?

But perhaps I'm too opinionated here, so for now I'm only going to nominate this sentence for its deserved fate, and leave it for the next editor to trigger the guillotine. &mdash; MaxEnt 17:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)