Amitai Weil wrote:
> I decided temporally to get rid of it by changing in
> line 69 from  "C < n" to "C < n-1".
The problem is not the line 69, the problem is that in this line the 
signal C will get the value n for one cycle. And then you have an access 
to changed_chk(C) which is limited to (n-1)...

Do you only want to run this whole thing in simulation or must ist be 
synthesizeable? If it must be synthesizeable (because of the clock):
did you ever see something like this in any synthesizeable VHDL 
description all around the world?

1

   for i in 0 to n-1 loop           -- row loop  

2

     if (clk'event and clk='1') then

No? And why?
You have never seen such a thing, because this is simply not 
synthesizeable.

Let me say it this way: a loop in VHDL (and also Verilog) is something 
completely different than a loop in an programming language (i should 
add at least 5 or 10 exclamation marks at the end of this sentence)!!!

And also the reset will not work as expected, because the later 
assignments to signals in the process will override the reset value 
(here for example tmp_stts):

1

      if (Rst_n='0') then            -- reset operation

2

        cur_st <= IDLE;

3

        memory_last_row <= (others => '0');

4

        C <= 0;

5

        tmp_Stts <= "00";

6

      end if;

7

8

      if i = n-1 and tmp_Stts = "00" then            -- COULMN check

9

        if    changed_chk(C) = '0' and D_in = "01" then

10

          tmp_Stts <= "01";

11

        elsif  changed_chk(C) = '0' and D_in = "10" then

12

          tmp_Stts <= "10";

13

        end if;

14

      end if;

15

16

      if D_in = "11" and tmp_Stts = "00" then        -- ROW check

17

        if  cur_st = X_chk then

18

          tmp_Stts <= "01";

19

        elsif cur_st = O_chk then

20

          tmp_Stts <= "10";

For signals in processes you must keep in mind: the last assignment 
wins!

> - final state machine (of D_in) for the row check.
Hmm, isn't that a "finite state machine" usually?
A "final" state machine is the "last and ultimate" state machine ever...

This here will never be true, becaue D_in is (according to your test 
bench" never "0-":

1

     case D_in is

2

        when "0-" =>

Here D_in must be exactly "0-", if you only want to check the left bit 
of D_in then you must write:

1

     case D_in(1) is

2

        when '0' =>

Thanks for all the comments,

The intension in this exercise is to make a simulation
by modelsim and that's why the clock is part of the
process.

I have made the changes in the part of the FSM ( -1 to D_in(1)),
so did i move the reset to the end of the main process.
As far as I know the commands in a process run by their order and
therefor I still don't see why the output isn't as expected

I attached above the DO file which runs the program in modelsim,
a capture of the wave-form of the simulated and synthesized program
by modelsim and the renewed program.

Amitai

Amitai Weil wrote:
> The intension in this exercise is to make a simulation by modelsim and
> that's why the clock is part of the process.
There is no clock needed for the checking of the matrix. See here my 
TicTacToe checking algo. You must of course add a bit more to read in 
data...

The idea of the program is that a user ( whom controls
"D_in" and "Rst_n") inserts the matrix row by row, in a left to right 
order.
The end of a line is announced by D_in = "11" and
an end of the whole matrix is announced by Rst_n = '0';
In case there's a winner found during the check process
the output should stay the same till the end of the check
( only one winner is possible).
if theres no winner in the check process the output Stts
will by "11"

At first I want to check only it theres a winner by
checking the rows, and leave aside in the meantime the columns check.

In the testbench I need to check these 5 options:
1. O row wins    2. X row wins   3. O column wins
4. X column wins   5. draw

At the first, second and last options the input is correct.
however in the rest there's a problem and the input is incorrect.
I assume the problem is somehow connected to the FSM,
and that for some reason the next state in the FSM is
depended on the current state.

any idea what's the problem?

I attached above the a capture of the wave-form of the simulated and 
synthesized program by modelsim and the renewed program.

Amitai

P.S.

Thanks for the program and the effort but I need to do actualize
the program in the framework of the conditions brought above.

I managed to implement a program which checks the rows of the array, now 
for the columns...

I want to implement An array of FSM situations, so that for each column 
that I'm checking presently they will be a memory
of the last row same column to compare to. that's because the 
information of the X/0 table is given by the input of the
user (testbench) and I don't want to save all of it.
( if the board is n*n and n=999999 .....)

so I wrote as follows:
type C_state_type is (IDLE_C, X_chk_C, O_chk_C, tmp_draw_C);
signal cur_st_C, nxt_st_C is array (1 to n) of C_state_type;

any idea if this can be implemented somehow? If so, what should I
change? because modelsim doesn't agree to this.

Thanks, Amitai

Amitai Weil wrote:
> any idea if this can be implemented somehow?
To shorten things: I did a little bit coding in the lunch break. Have a 
look at it...