Re: cleaning up 1364-2001

From: Peter Flake (Peter.Flake@synopsys.com)
Date: Wed Jan 15 2003 - 09:00:13 PST

  • Next message: Brad Pierce: "Re: errata/237: A.7.5.3: scalar_timing_check_expressions has redundancies"

    Precedence: bulk

    Shalom,

    Nowadays there are multiple reference simulators.

    BTW the easy decision for a tool implementer is to allow spaces in
    @(*). In BNF
             '(' '*' ')' | '(*' ')' | '(' '*)'

    Peter.

    At 12:48 15/01/2003 +0200, Shalom Bresticker wrote:
    >Precedence: bulk
    >
    >Sorry to "beat a dead horse", but I find it difficult to accept the
    >argument that developers and users know what the correct meaning of what
    >is written in the LRM. We have quite a few issues in which we have not
    >even been able to agree among ourselves what is the correct
    >interpretation. We still don't know how generates are supposed to work.
    > Heck, we haven't even been able to agree whether spaces are allowed in
    >@(*) ! (Looks like a curse...)
    >
    >Gone are the days in which there was a "golden reference
    >simulator" (Verilog-XL) which was already mature when the standard came
    >out. (Even then, it was only good if you had a license for it.)
    >
    >Also gone are the days in which a simulator came with its own LRM.
    >Today it just points to IEEE 1364-2001.
    >
    >
    >--
    >Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
    >Design & Reuse Methodology Tel: +972 9 9522268
    >Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890
    >POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 441478
    >
    >"The devil is in the details."

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 09:04:56 PST and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.