RE: [sv-ac] new mantis item and proposal #1641

Hi Manisha,

I think that John meant calling $error etc. from a task that is called
from within a sequence.

ed 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On 
> Behalf Of Kulshrestha, Manisha
> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 3:32 PM
> To: john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] new mantis item and proposal #1641
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> I have uploaded an updated proposal(severity_tasks_2.htm) which takes
> care of issues 1 and 2. This proposal also takes care of Shalom's
> comment about printing of simulation time. 
> 
> I do not quite understand your point 3. In what situations you think
> someone may call $error as a match item subroutine ? Also, 
> how do we use
> it as part of evaluation. Could you please elaborate on this.
> 
> Thanks.
> Manisha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
> Behalf Of John Havlicek
> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 9:14 AM
> To: sv-ac@server.eda-stds.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-ac] new mantis item and proposal #1641
> 
> Hi Manisha:
> 
> This is an excellent proposal.  I had something similar on my list of
> enhancements and had not got around to posting a mantis item.
> 
> I have a few comments.
> 
> 1. For severity tasks in general sequential code, did you 
>    intend only to require line number, or did you really intend
>    both file name and line number to be printed?
> 
> 2. I think there is some more language in Section 17 that could
>    benefit from some touch up to be consistent with the relaxation
>    of the rule that the severity tasks be used only in the "else" 
>    action block.  E.g., the paragraph beginning
> 
>       Because the assertion is a statement that something must
>       be true ...
> 
>    on p. 232.  Also, we might want to say a little more in 17.13
>    to make it clearer that the same conventions for using severity
>    tasks in action blocks of immediate assertions apply to concurrent
>    assertions.
> 
> 3. Another topic is the use of severity tasks as subroutine calls
>    attached to sequences.  I think we should consider whether 
>    the result of the assertion evaluation should be sensitive to 
>    something like a $error called as a subroutine attached to 
>    a sequnce.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> John H.
> 
> > Hello,
> > =20
> > I have filed a new mantis item #1641. A proposal has been added to 
> > enable usage of assertion severity system tasks in general Verilog
> code.
> > =20
> > Thanks.
> > Manisha
> 
>