From: Tom Fitzpatrick (tfitz@cadence.com)
Date: Tue Jan 19 1999 - 07:56:02 PST
BAD MSG:
Hi Stu,
-Lines: 99
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 4327
X-Status: $$$$
X-UID: 0000000805
Status: RO
The reason that the working group didn't want to use the term 'view' was
that someone thought that it was being used as a keyword in Verilog-AMS.
That was the only objection that I recall. We have since verified that it
is not being used in Verilog-AMS and therefore there is no reason (other
than possibly opinions about aesthetics) not to use it.
I suppose we can discuss this again at Monday's meeting.
Thanks,
-Tom
At 07:24 AM 1/19/99 -0800, Stuart Sutherland wrote:
>Just to add my $.02 worth: At the last IEEE 1364 meeting, the working
>group was polled for general feelings about what should go into the
>standard regarding consensus. I remember very distinctly that the
>overwhelming majority felt that the term "view" should not be used.
>
>Stu
>
>At 03:23 AM 1/19/99, Kev wrote:
>>Tom Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> You are correct that the Verilog 'view' is equivalent to the VHDL
>>> 'architecture'. According to our representative to Verilog-AMS, your
>>> proposal to use the term 'view' in Verilog-AMS was defeated. The term
>>> 'view' is NOT part of Verilog-AMS, and is therefore free for us to use in
>>> configurations. Besides, the term 'arch' is a relatively common macro, and
>>> making it a keyword would break existing designs.
>>
>>There was no vote on the use of the word 'view', the vote was about
>>whether you can see multiple views of a signal in the same context e.g.
>>have two processes in the same module one (say) contributing current and
>>another reading the logic value (this sort of thing would happen if you
>>back annotate a capacitor into your logic and flatten the hierarchy). The
>>vote was won by Cadence's "single view" scheme - which doesn't allow the
>>user to specify that kind of module, but both "views" still exist. I
>>will probably raise the issue again in the IEEE comittees, since there
>>are major semantic problems with the Cadence Verilog-AMS proposal in this
>>and other areas.
>>
>>BTW (since you work in Cycle Simulation), the argument about multiple views
>>of signals extends to mixing regular Verilog behavior and reduced
>>representations like those in cycle-based simulators, i.e. where the
>>Verilog[-D] view of the signal is 0/1/X and strength supply/strong/pull/
>>weak/highz, the cycle-simulator view is usually 0/1 (without strength).
>>On the boundary betweeen (say) Verilog-XL and your cycle-based simulator
>>you will have two views: the V-XL view (say 'Z') and the cycle simulators
>>view (a corresponding '0' or '1'), although the actual physical signal is
>>the same.
>>
>>I'm hoping that if you use "archtecture" instead of "view" it will avoid
>>confusion when we get around to discussing the two topics at the same time.
>>I don't really mind if you use 'view' as the keyword in the language
>>definition, as long as the semantic description makes it clear that it
>>represents architecture (as in VHDL).
>>
>>Regards,
>>Kev.
>>
>>> Thanks for your input,
>>> -Tom
>>>
>>> At 10:47 PM 1/15/99 +0000, Kev wrote:
>>> >Hi again,
>>> >
>>> >Since I received no response to the question about whether
>>> >Verilog 'view' is equivalent to VHDL 'architecture' I'll
>>> >assume that it is.
>>..
>>> Senior Technical Marketing Manager Cadence Design
>Systems, Inc.
>>> Cycle Simulation Products 270 Billerica Rd.
>>> Logic Design and Verification Business Unit Chelmsford, MA 01824
>>> x6438 (978)446-6438
>>
>>--
>>http://www.v-ms.com
>>mailto:admin@v-ms.com Mixed Signal Simulation
>>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Stuart Sutherland Sutherland HDL Inc.
>stuart@sutherland.com 22805 SW 92nd Place
>phone: 503-692-0898 Tualatin, OR 97062
>
>www.sutherland.com
>
>Specializing in Verilog HDL consulting and training.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
---------------
Tom Fitzpatrick
Senior Technical Marketing Manager Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
Cycle Simulation Products 270 Billerica Rd.
Logic Design and Verification Business Unit Chelmsford, MA 01824
x6438 (978)446-6438
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Mon Jul 08 2002 - 12:53:25 PDT
and
sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.