Re: [sv-ac] 1547 review

From: Bassam Tabbara <Bassam.Tabbara_at_.....>
Date: Tue Feb 20 2007 - 20:33:57 PST
Hi Lisa,

You declare them there to get the clocking and can always assert thru cb's name.

THX. 
-Bassam

-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Piper <piper@cadence.com>
To: Bassam Tabbara <Bassam.Tabbara@synopsys.COM>; sv-ac@eda-stds.org <sv-ac@eda-stds.org>
Sent: Tue Feb 20 20:02:07 2007
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] 1547 review

Hi Bassam,

 

I guess I don’t understand the use model.  When would you want to define properties and sequences in a clocking block?  When would you do this and not want to assert them?

 

Lisa

 

________________________________

From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Bassam Tabbara
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:17 PM
To: sv-ac@eda-stds.org
Subject: [sv-ac] 1547 review

 

The proposal seems fine but I disagree with what its objective. I believe the clocking block is a declaration scope so it would be quite inadequate to add executing statements into a construct intended to orthogonalize clocking/sampling definition (declaration) from structure/behavior. Putting asserts there is undesirable in my opinion, and would open the door to other statements.

Thx.

-Bassam.

 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is 
believed to be clean. 

-- This message has been scanned for viruses anddangerous content by MailScanner, and isbelieved to be clean.
Received on Tue Feb 20 20:34:26 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 20 2007 - 20:34:38 PST