Re: enhancement/17: 12.1.3 is not clear enough about permitted defparam usage

From: Shalom Bresticker (Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com)
Date: Wed May 12 2004 - 02:50:01 PDT

  • Next message: Steven Sharp: "Re: enhancement/350: PROPOSAL - Deprecate configs in Verilog source"

    The following reply was made to PR errata/17; it has been noted by GNATS.

    From: Shalom Bresticker <Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com>
    To: Jason Woolf <jasonw@cadence.com>
    Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com
    Subject: Re: enhancement/17: 12.1.3 is not clear enough about permitted defparam
     usage
    Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 13:07:06 +0300

     I have no problem with any of these formulations.
     Should I insert it into the proposal for generates (#113) or should we leave it separate?
     
     Shalom
     
     
     Jason Woolf wrote:
     
    > Gord,
    >
    > Combining your approach and mine, I get the following wording:
    >
    > Note: Each instantiation of a generate block is considered
    > to be a separate generate scope. Therefore this rule implies
    > that a defparam statement in a generate block may not target
    > a parameter in another instantiation of the same generate block,
    > even when the other instantiation is created by the same loop
    > generate construct. For example...
    >
    > Have I captured your intent in a slightly more compact form?
    > Shalom is the ultimate arbiter, since he's in control of the
    > official document.
     

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed May 12 2004 - 02:50:39 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.