RE: [sv-ac] vpi object model for "assertion"

Hi Bassam,

I see. Thanks. But then there are object diagrams for sequence decl and
property decl too, how are they located? From where?

Best...
ed 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bassam Tabbara [mailto:bassamt@synopsys.COM] 
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 4:31 PM
> To: Eduard Cerny; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] vpi object model for "assertion"
> 
> Hi Ed,
> 
> They should be inst(ance)s as in diagram. This diagram corresponds to
> clause 38 -- "direct access" API and encompasses all the "assertion
> types" incl. assume/cover/seq/... Anything that can have a 
> "value" (aka
> result) i.e. success (match)/...
> 
> We have been updating (I hope :)) e.g. immediate assume 
> etc... went here
> too. The shortcoming that comes to mind now is that 38.3.2 
> "list" may be
> missed -- probably best to say "e.g." there instead of having to
> maintain it and add a reference to VPI diagram.
> 
> Thx.
> -Bassam.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Eduard Cerny
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 1:14 PM
> To: sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: [sv-ac] vpi object model for "assertion"
> 
> Hi,
> 
> in clause 36.42 Assertion of draft 3a, should "property inst" and
> "sequence inst" be instead "property decl" and "sequence decl"?
> 
> In general we do not seem to provide update for this object 
> model in our
> proposal, how is it updated?
> 
> Thanks,
> ed
> 
> 
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.