Re: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues

Subject: Re: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues
From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Date: Sat Feb 15 2003 - 09:23:33 PST

• Next message: Cindy Eisner: "[sv-ac] assertions embedded in procedural code"
• Previous message: Adam Krolnik: "Re: [sv-ac] First match example and match of past."
• In reply to: Cindy Eisner: "Re: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues"
• Next in thread: Jay Lawrence: "RE: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues"
• Reply: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com: "Re: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Actually, "or" is also used for "or" gate primitives.

> definition 1 of consistent: the current use of "or" in verilog is only for
> event expressions, therefore consistency demands keeping it so.

Shalom

• Next message: Cindy Eisner: "[sv-ac] assertions embedded in procedural code"
• Previous message: Adam Krolnik: "Re: [sv-ac] First match example and match of past."
• In reply to: Cindy Eisner: "Re: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues"
• Next in thread: Jay Lawrence: "RE: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues"
• Reply: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com: "Re: [sv-ac] syntax: compatibility with verilog and other issues"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 09:25:20 PST