RE: [sv-bc] Upward referencing rules question

I invoked them the same way as the others.
They identified a1 as top-level modules, so presumably #2 is the reason.

Shalom

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Sharp [mailto:sharp@cadence.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 9:48 PM
> To: sv-bc@eda-stds.org; Bresticker, Shalom
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Upward referencing rules question
> 
> 
> >From: "Bresticker, Shalom" <shalom.bresticker@intel.com>
> 
> >Actually, implementations differ on this case. Some print 5, 
> some give 
> >an error.
> 
> Do you know the reasons for the errors?
> 
> The two I can think of are:
> 
> 1. The implementations did not instantiate a1 as a top-level 
> module (or perhaps you invoked them in a way that caused them 
> not to do so, such as by explicitly specifying the top-level 
> module instead of letting them infer them).
> 
> 2. The implementations did not backtrack after a partial 
> match of a hierarchical name.
> 
> Steven Sharp
> sharp@cadence.com
> 
> 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.