As a user, I have also often thought so. How about it, vendors? At one time, I actually recommended rerunning simulations on a different vendor's simulator as a way of possibly exposing such problems. > I've often thought that a useful (and amusing) > switch to have in an implementation would be "- > randomize_scheduling" > which would actually go out of its way to permute the "natural" > scheduling order. This would expose huge numbers of bad > assumptions that designers make regarding simulation > semantics. ShalomReceived on Wed Mar 22 01:12:03 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Mar 22 2006 - 01:13:17 PST