Re: [sv-bc] Update on SV-BC 291

Doug,

Does this proposal for 3.14 indicate that you don't yet approve of the
language proposed for 3.14 in erratum 254?

    http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/att-2181/aggregate_constructors6.htm

If so, could you help me understand your concerns?

Also, it might be good to make extra clear that the order of assignment
of unpacked slices is unspecified. Consider for example, the following
test case

module m;
initial begin
    reg [31:0] A[1:4];
    reg [1:4] [31:0] B;
    A[1] = 1; A[2] = 2; A[3] = 3; A[4] = 4;
    B[1] = 1; B[2] = 2; B[3] = 3; B[4] = 4;

    A[2:4] = A[1:3];
    B[2:4] = B[1:3];
    $display("A|1|1|2|3||%d|%d|%d|%d|", A[1], A[2], A[3], A[4]);
    $display("B|1|1|2|3||%d|%d|%d|%d|", B[1], B[2], B[3], B[4]);
    end
endmodule

You are not guaranteed that these two $displays will be the same.

-- Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org]On Behalf Of
Warmke, Doug
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 8:49 AM
To: sv-bc@eda.org
Subject: [sv-bc] Update on SV-BC 291

SV-BC,

Dave Rich suggested that I merge this proposal with the proposal
for item 111 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0000111).

I have done so by taking the proposal located in 111, copying it
(including all blue and red changes), and then extending it with
the original proposal I made for 291.

The original proposal I made is located in the SV-291.htm attachment.
The merged 111/291 proposal is in the SV-291-1.htm attachment.
If we pass this proposal, we can obsolete the proposal in 111
in favor of this one.

    SV-291.htm:
http://www.eda.org/svdb/file_download.php?file_id=295&type=bug
    SV-291-1.htm:
http://www.eda.org/svdb/file_download.php?file_id=297&type=bug

Regards,
Doug
Received on Fri Nov 5 10:21:17 2004