Subject: Re: $sv-ec Proposal for Random Constraints for SV-extension
From: Adam Krolnik (krolnik@lsil.com)
Date: Thu Nov 21 2002 - 08:44:12 PST
Hi Mehdi;
You wrote:
"The type randc can be thought of as a short-hand for rand unique."
It may be better to have a longer-hand than 'randc' for this difference in
functionality. The keyword 'randc' is not visually distinct enough from rand.
These proposed extensions have some overlap with assertions. The SV-AC group
has been talking about the fact that assumptions on a set of inputs to a
block can constitute a specification of constraints for legal stimulus
to be applied.
Maybe this proposal needs to be sync'd up with work that the SV-AC is doing.
For example, this proposal defines operators 'inside' and '=>', both concepts
which have been discussed in the SV-AC. It would be highly useful to use
common syntax.
Thanks.
Adam Krolnik
Verification Mgr.
LSI Logic Corp.
Plano TX. 75074
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Nov 21 2002 - 08:46:55 PST