Subject: Re: [sv-ac] sequence delay syntax
From: dudani@us04.synopsys.com
Date: Wed Feb 05 2003 - 11:51:04 PST
Hi Adam,
You have correctly translated unary to binary using true(value 1).
Surrendra
At 01:33 PM 2/5/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>Hi Surrendra;
>
>It is difficult to fully evaluate your proposal:
>
>1. You have compressed three productions (sequence_expr, seqeuence_phrase,
> and sequence element) into one.
>
>2. You have not included everything into the production,
> " | <other sequence construct>"
>
>
>
>Regarding removal of unary delay;
>
>Here are some examples from 0.79:
>
>([0] a) ==> a
>([1] a) ==> true; a
>([0:3] a) ==> (a) or (true;a) or (true;true;a) or (true;true;true;a)
>
>0.79 also states,
>
>"A ';' followed by an optional range specifies that the sequence_expr
>should occur later
>than the current cycle. ... A range of [0] specifies that the next element
>should occur
>in parallel with the current cycle."
>
>
>Without unary delay, I would recode these as (using 1 instead of true):
>
>([0] a) ==> 1;[0] a
>([1] a) ==> 1; a
>([0:3] a) ==> 1;[0:3] a
>
>Is this correct?
That is correct.
> THanks.
>
> Adam Krolnik
> Verification Mgr.
> LSI Logic Corp.
> Plano TX. 75074
>
>
>
>
**********************************************
Surrendra A. Dudani
Synopsys, Inc.
377 Simarano Drive
Suite 300
Marlboro, MA 01752
Tel: 508-263-8072
Fax: 508-263-8123
email: dudani@synopsys.com
**********************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Feb 05 2003 - 11:52:16 PST