Erik, An enhancement proposal will usually get more feedback if it is also distributed on the reflector, instead of just uploaded to Mantis, so I've attached a copy of your current version. Your document is not in the form of a formal proposal, but apparently it would add new keywords 'checker' and 'endchecker', plus a new system function $notdet() for making a nondeterminstic choice between arguments. Is a system function the best syntax for the latter capability? Why not add a true operator like |~| for internal choice? Also, I don't think it would be a good idea to add comments like the following to the LRM "A free variable appears only in checkers, and thus should never be synthesized into silicon." -- Brad -----Original Message----- From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Seligman, Erik Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:17 AM To: sv-ac@eda-stds.org Subject: [sv-ac] Checker construct proposal: any comments yet? Hi all-- Just wanted to send a reminder to take a look at this new proposal, on 'checker' constructs, when you get the chance: http://www.verilog.org/mantis/view.php?id=1900 This is a relatively major language enhancement, so it might be good to start discussion going so we can begin revising it & converge in a reasonable time frame. I suspect there will be many questions and issues. Thanks! -- 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.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jul 02 2007 - 09:06:57 PDT