From: Shalom Bresticker (Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com)
Date: Thu Aug 01 2002 - 01:40:07 PDT
Precedence: bulk
The following reply was made to PR errata/84; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Shalom Bresticker <Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com>
To: sharp@cadence.com
Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com
Subject: Re: errata/84: Should @* include delay controls?
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 11:35:44 +0300
Generally, my feeling is that we should remember that the implicit
event_expression list is supposed to facilitate combinational logic.
Therefore, it should include, if at all possible, whatever is necessary
to simulate combinational logic correctly.
Other stuff, such as those mentioned here, or the side-effects mentioned
in errata/82,
don't need to concern us so much. That is, we can define it as we wish,
and the result is whatever it is,
as long as combinational logic descriptions still work correctly.
I do accept the idea that where there is a comparable continuous
assignment,
the behavior should be similar to that of the continuous assignment.
Shalom
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Thu Oct 10 2002 - 09:24:27 PDT
and
sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.