Re: [sv-ec] Re: [sv-bc] potential command line option

From: Randy Misustin (ram@model.com)
Date: Thu Apr 21 2005 - 18:07:30 PDT

  • Next message: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com: "Re: 1364 Meeting (telecon) on Wednesday, 4/27 at noon EDT"

    Steven,

    That's good data.

    I feel the 15% number you've been using may overrepresent the Verilog
    community as a whole, but on the other hand it's not all that close to
    zero either. We've been shipping software with these keywords in place
    for a year and a half and have certainly had many reports of keyword
    conflict, but neither those reports nor our inventory of customer
    designs would indicate 15% (this is just feel, but probably more like
    half of that). So let's say your number is high and mine is low....10%
    is still enough to worry about so I haven't worried overly much about
    the 15% number you've been using.

    What I wasn't sure of, though, was whether 'cell' or 'config' was the
    main culprit. We've seen both but I hadn't had a reason to track which
    was the greater issue.I accept your view that 'config' is around 2/3 of
    the issue, so I concur with your assessment that the lexical hack is too
    messy to be justified if it only solves a third of the problem.

    That at least simplifies the decision to all or nothing. The middle
    ground doesn't seem worth doing.

    -randy.

    Steven Sharp wrote:

    >Randy,
    >
    >I will get back to the rest of your email later, but I wanted to
    >respond to one item now.
    >
    >
    >
    >>In the spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to
    >>consider separating the two lists if we could retain the keyword,
    >>config, in the Verilog source keywords. This would at least allow us to
    >>implement a messy lexical analyzer mode change based on this keyword.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I appreciate the spirit. If this would have resolved the problem, I
    >might have suggested something similar myself (even though I strongly
    >dislike context sensitive lexing). Unfortunately, the keyword "config"
    >is the main cause of keyword conflicts.
    >
    >In our suite of 67 real customer designs that we use for testing, "config"
    >is used as an identifier in 7 designs (or 10.5%). An additional 3 designs
    >(4.5%) used "cell" as an identifier. None of the other config keywords
    >appeared . So eliminating all of the config keywords except "config"
    >wouldn't help much.
    >
    >Changing to less-used keywords to replace "config" and "cell" would solve
    >the main problem, but would not be backward compatible.
    >
    >Steven Sharp
    >sharp@cadence.com
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 21 2005 - 17:44:02 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.