RE: [sv-bc] Errata in SV 3.1a LRM Section 18.4: inconsistent use of error and warning

There already is a way to do this:

always @(posedge clk)
        if (resten)
                begin end
        else
                unique case (sel)
                        val1: etc...
                endcase

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
Andrew MacCormack
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:16 AM
To: Steven Sharp
Cc: sv-bc@eda.org; Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com
Subject: Re: [sv-bc] Errata in SV 3.1a LRM Section 18.4: inconsistent
use of error and warning

[...]

Since unique and priority have implicit assertions associated with them,

should there be a mechanism to set further conditions on those
assertions so
that there are no false warnings/errors?

For example:

unique @(posedge clk) case (sel)
  val1: etc...
endcase

or:

unique disable iff (~resetn) case (sel)
  val1: etc...
endcase

-- 
-- Andrew MacCormack                            andrewm@cadence.com
-- Senior Design Engineer                    Phone: +44 1506 595360
-- Cadence Design Foundry      http://www.cadence.com/designfoundry
-- Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7HH, UK        Fax: +44 1506 595959