Cliff, > The real solution to this problem is to check connectivity as > I proposed in August. If connectivity, which finds all of the > same problems and more, is better served by linting tools (as > suggested by the SV-BC in August), then this proposal, which > only finds a small subset of the problems and misses many > more problems including problems potentially introduced by > the required declarations, should also be left to linting tools. Many if not most of these would have to warnings and not errors anyways, because sometimes, even often, they are OK, and we know how engineers relate to warnings. One difference between linting and simulation is that in simulation, the engineer's purpose is to simulate, so he will be more likely to ignore warnings. In linting, the whole purpose is to find problems, so he will be more likely to pay attention to the warnings. > > I can't believe we are considering this addition while > discarding a far superior solution. > > Try this - add both `default_nettype port_type wire AND > connectivity checking and I promise you that engineers will > overwhelmingly use connectivity checking and discard this > half-baked solution. Nope. We already have connectivity checking, but we want this as well. I still think you are in a minority of designers on this one. Shalom --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mon Oct 1 00:27:17 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 01 2007 - 00:27:44 PDT