Korchemny, Dmitry wrote: > Hi all, > > I am attaching a presentation for tomorrow. > > Thanks, > Dmitry I've taken a quick look at the slides. You did deal with at least one of the questions that I had outstanding -- what is the meaning of forcing a checker variable? You suggest that it should be illegal. Does that apply to all forms of procedural continuous assignments to such a variable? What about other assignments? What would it mean, for example, to have an NBA to or from a checker freevar? What about use of a freevar on the RHS of a continuous assignment? For example: assign w = some_checker.some_freevar; At what point does "some_freevar" change according to the simulation cycle? Is it even guaranteed to change? Particularly for an unassigned freevar, it seems that there is no requirement for the freevar to ever change. How much simulator implementation variability is valid? From what I think I've heard, it seems unlikely to me that inspecting or using a freevar value during simulation would be terribly useful, particularly given the lack of constraints on the implementation behavior in assigning to the unassigned freevars. Is that the case? If so, should all non-checker use of a freevar just be made illegal? It might be more useful in terms of cross-vendor consistency to define how simulators MUST select the values of unassigned freevars. Even something trivial like assigning them all the value zero or possibly having a separate RNG that is used. Vendors could also extend things in other ways, but having reasonably predictable cross-vendor behavior would seem to be an important goal. Gord. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Mar 10 00:07:48 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 10 2008 - 00:09:55 PDT