RE: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] Upward referencing rules question

Dave,

Doesn't $root always refer to a particular one of the top-level
instances?  It's not a super-instance that unites the forest of
top-level instances into a tree, is it?

-- Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
Rich, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 12:17 PM
To: Steven Sharp; shalom.bresticker@intel.com; danielm@aldec.com.pl
Cc: sv-bc@eda.org
Subject: RE: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] Upward referencing rules question

I still don't agree - a1 is not an enclosing scope. And now in SV, $root
is the true top level scope, and a1 is a child of $root.

Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Sharp [mailto:sharp@cadence.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 11:40 AM
> To: sharp@cadence.com; shalom.bresticker@intel.com;
danielm@aldec.com.pl;
> Rich, Dave
> Cc: sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] Upward referencing rules question
> 
> 
> >From: "Rich, Dave" <Dave_Rich@mentor.com>
> 
> >No, searching has always been upwards in the hierarchy; hence the
name
> >of the section describing this feature has always been called
"upwards
> >name referencing"
> >
> >The module a1 in the example is not on an upwards path to the root of

> >the hierarchy from the reference.
> 
> I don't have the example in front of me any more, but as I recall, the

> module a1 was not instantiated anywhere.  My reply was based on that 
> understanding.
> 
> In that case, it is a top-level module.  That puts it on an upwards 
> path from any reference.
> 
> Steven Sharp
> sharp@cadence.com


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.