Subject: Re: [sv-ac] written proposal: sem5
From: Cindy Eisner (EISNER@il.ibm.com)
Date: Tue Feb 25 2003 - 02:13:34 PST
adam,
>Is this syntax too similar to the parameter syntax?
probably. i just followed the use of parentheses as in revision 0.79 for
the declaration of a dynamic variable, moving it up a level. any
suggestions?
cindy.
Cindy Eisner
Formal Methods Group Tel: +972-4-8296-266
IBM Haifa Research Laboratory Fax: +972-4-8296-114
Haifa 31905, Israel e-mail:
eisner@il.ibm.com
Adam Krolnik <krolnik@lsil.com> on 24/02/2003 18:40:44
To: Cindy Eisner/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
cc: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ac] written proposal: sem5
Hi Cindy;
You proposed:
>examples:
>property p1 (int x) (valid_in) => (x = pipe_in ;[5] pipe_out1 == x+1);
Is this syntax too similar to the parameter syntax? Will one be confused to
see
(int x) as possibly an argument for the property? Or see a parameter for
a property as a variable being assigned?
From 0.79 doc, pg 64
property abc(a, b, c) = accept(a==2) never @clk (b;c);
I.e.
property pabcx (a, b, c) (int x) valid_in =>
(x = pipe_in; a;b;c [1:10] pipe_out1 = x+1);
Adam Krolnik
Verification Mgr.
LSI Logic Corp.
Plano TX. 75074
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Feb 25 2003 - 02:11:44 PST