HDL design best practices When developing a digital system in HDL, which of the following is the worst mistake from a verification and maintainability standpoint?

Introduction / Context:
Complex HDL projects benefit from incremental development and continuous verification. The cost of bugs grows exponentially the later they are found. A disciplined workflow avoids compounding errors.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Multiple modules (counters, sequencers, interfaces) must integrate cleanly.
• Simulation, synthesis checks, and on-hardware tests are available.
• Version control and documentation are recommended.

Concept / Approach:
The worst practice is to pile on untested code. Each new block can mask earlier bugs and multiply the debugging space. Instead, follow “build a little, test a little”: unit-test modules, then integrate gradually with self-checking testbenches and assertions.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Track bug origin by commit history; teams that add untested code see longer integration times. Continuous integration (CI) with regression tests mitigates this risk.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Concluding a block works perfectly: Overconfident, but not as damaging as skipping testing entirely.
• Failing documentation: Harmful to maintainability, yet testing still finds functional bugs.
• Overlooking a variable: A minor coding slip compared to systemic lack of testing.

Common Pitfalls:
Skipping corner cases, not modeling resets and metastability, and ignoring synthesis warnings—each magnifies when untested blocks accumulate.

Final Answer:
Adding blocks of code prior to testing them