Re: [sv-bc] Section 28.9 typo

From: Greg Jaxon <Greg.Jaxon@synopsys.com>
Date: Thu May 06 2010 - 09:13:54 PDT

Yes.  Thanks - sorry to bother you.

Bresticker, Shalom wrote:

Greg,

I believe it *is* legal. Look at 28.3.

Shalom 

  

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On 
Behalf Of Greg Jaxon
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 6:16 AM
To: SV_BC List
Subject: [sv-bc] Section 28.9 typo

Section 28.9 covering cmos switches uses an example wherein the gates
are not given instance names - illegal syntax.
I think this happens because the equivalence it is trying to 
illustrate
is not available as a mere rewrite of the netlist.
Can we do something to indicate that this example is not legal code?

Greg
    

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

  

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean. Received on Thu May 6 09:14:10 2010