Subject: [sv-bc] Array signing clarification
From: Karen Pieper (Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com)
Date: Wed Jan 28 2004 - 09:34:48 PST
>X-Authentication-Warning: gb01.internal.synopsys.com: iscan owned process
>doing -bs
>X-Sender: flake@gb01.synopsys.com
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
>Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:25:46 +0000
>To: pieper@synopsys.COM
>From: Peter Flake <flake@synopsys.COM>
>Subject: Fwd: Array signing clarification
>
>Hi Karen,
>
>Could you please file this as a future clarification for BC?
>
>Regards,
>
>Peter.
>
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I propose the following changes to LRM (draft 3) section 4.2. Please let
>>me know if these are not clear enough.
>>
>>CHANGE
>>If a packed array is declared as signed, then the array viewed as a
>>single vector shall be signed. A part-select of
>>a packed array shall be unsigned.
>>
>>TO
>>If a packed array is declared as signed, then the array viewed as a
>>single vector shall be signed. The individual elements of the array are
>>unsigned unless they are of a named type declared as signed. A
>>part-select of a packed array shall be unsigned.
>>
>>AFTER
>>
>>The following operations can be performed on packed arrays, but not on
>>unpacked arrays. The examples provided
>>with these rules assume that A is an array.
>>— Assignment from an integer, e.g., A = 8’b11111111;
>>— Treatment as an integer in an expression, e.g., (A + 3)
>>
>>INSERT
>>
>>If a unpacked array is declared as signed, then this applies to the
>>individual elements of the array, since the whole array cannot be viewed
>>as a single vector.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Peter.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 28 2004 - 09:42:04 PST