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

From: Steven Sharp <sharp_at_.....>
Date: Tue Feb 12 2008 - 14:16:48 PST
>>From: "Rich, Dave" <Dave_Rich@mentor.com>
>
>>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.

I see another possible source of confusion here.  The reference in
the example uses the name of the module a1.

There is a special case in an upward search where a reference can use
the name of the module instead of the name of an instance of the module.
This is only allowed if the reference is inside/under the module, in
which case it resolves to the instance it is inside/under.  So for that
rule to apply, a1 would have to be an ancestor of the reference.

But that is not the rule that is being applied to resolve this name.
For a top-level module, the name of the instance is the same as the
name of the module.  So the top-level instance of a1 has an instance
name of a1.  So the a1 in the name is being resolved to the instance a1,
which is found in $root (or alternately, is the start of a full
hierarchical path).

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 Tue Feb 12 14:17:15 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 12 2008 - 14:17:24 PST