>From: "Bresticker, Shalom" <shalom.bresticker@intel.com> >> BTW, while I do know of implementations that do port coercion >> and others that do collapsing, I don't know of any that don't >> do either. There are good reasons for that -- the real >> behavior becomes pretty strange and not acceptable to >> customers. So I wouldn't belabor the "if neither occurs" >> case since I really don't think you could ever get a useful >> implementation if you didn't do either. > >According to that, you could never get the warning? But I have seen it. In other words, you have seen an implementation that did not do either in some cases, and gave you a warning that the behavior might cause problems. I would be curious if it really did a full analysis of whether the port direction was wrong, a limited local analysis, or rather blindly. Without a full analysis, I would expect a lot of false warnings, which would then start being ignored. I would also be surprised if this is a successful commercial tool, for the same reasons Gord describes. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Dec 13 13:19:15 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 13 2007 - 13:19:26 PST