Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 4342280
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 21, 20262026-05-21T11:35:50+00:00 2026-05-21T11:35:50+00:00

I have seen the following used to make state changes in Verilog modules: state

  • 0

I have seen the following used to make state changes in Verilog modules:

state <= 2'b10;

state <= #1 IDLE;

Why is <= used and not just =? What is the purpose of using #1? Does it make a difference?

Here is some Verilog code for a FSM that shows the first one being used. Would it work the same if it was replaced with the second?

module fsm( clk, rst, inp, outp);

   input clk, rst, inp;
   output outp;

   reg [1:0] state;
   reg outp;

   always @( posedge clk, posedge rst )
   begin
   if( rst )
       state <= 2'b00;
   else
   begin
       case( state )
       2'b00:
       begin
            if( inp ) state <= 2'b01;
            else state <= 2'b10;
       end

       2'b01:
       begin
            if( inp ) state <= 2'b11;
            else state <= 2'b10;
       end

       2'b10:
       begin
            if( inp ) state <= 2'b01;
            else state <= 2'b11;
       end

       2'b11:
       begin
            if( inp ) state <= 2'b01;
            else state <= 2'b10;
       end
       endcase
   end
end
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-21T11:35:50+00:00Added an answer on May 21, 2026 at 11:35 am

    In a sequential logic always block like yours, it is better to use non-blocking assignments (<=) instead of blocking assignments (=). Simulations will be better representative of the actual resulting logic.

    In pure RTL Verilog code, if you are using non-blocking assignments for all sequential logic, there should be no reason to use #1 delays.

    I have also seen others use # delays like this. Sometimes it is due to mixing RTL and gate netlists in the same simulation. Other times it is done to compensate for poor modeling. You should avoid using delays in RTL code if you can.

    See also:
    Nonblocking Assignments in Verilog Synthesis, Coding Styles That Kill!

    Also, it is better to use a parameter to name each of your states. It is much more meaningful if a state is named IDLE instead of 2'b10.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have seen and used C++ code like the following: int myFourcc = 'ABCD';
I have seen the following href used in webpages from time to time. However,
i have seen that ajaxStart/ajaxStop always used against a DIV . Consider the following:
I have seen the following methods of putting JavaScript code in an <a> tag:
I have seen the following code: [DefaultValue(100)] [Description(Some descriptive field here)] public int MyProperty{...}
I have seen the following exception case several times public SomeClass(IEnumerable<T> someValues) { if
I have seen the following #include directives: #include <xstring> #include <cstring> #include <string> #include
I have seen some websites use the following tag: <meta type=title content=Title of the
I have seen a web page source code containing the following css declaration at
I have seen many articles and Questions/Answers Regarding Lock Escalation but following things are

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.