Re: [sv-ac] written proposal: issue 15


Subject: Re: [sv-ac] written proposal: issue 15
From: Adam Krolnik (krolnik@lsil.com)
Date: Wed Feb 26 2003 - 10:45:55 PST


Hi John, Cindy;

Currently your proposal allows:

module test;

a1: assert initial @(posedge clk) (a; b; c);
a2: assert always @(posedge clk) (a; b; c);
a3: cover initial @(posedge clk) (a; b; c);
a4: cover always @(posedge clk) (a; b; c);

endmodule

These are declarative versions.

How much different is this:

module test;

always @(posedge clk) a1: assert (a; b; c);
initial @(posedge clk) a2: assert (a; b; c);
always @(posedge clk) a3: cover (a; b; c);
initial @(posedge clk) a4: cover (a; b; c);

endmodule

Maybe we should simplify the property sequence/expr grammar. Through the use of
the initial/always blocks we would not need to define always/initial as keywords,
but instead through the extraction rules we would obtain the necessary once or always
status.

Does this miss something with named properties and such?

    Adam Krolnik
    Verification Mgr.
    LSI Logic Corp.
    Plano TX. 75074



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Feb 26 2003 - 10:47:50 PST