RE: [sv-ac] notes from SV-AC meeting 2007-09-25

As already pointed out, if the foreach begin-end contained a
declaration, then it would not be proper to remove the block name from
it.
 
Shalom


________________________________

	From: Seligman, Erik 
	Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 11:40 PM
	To: Bresticker, Shalom; 'john.havlicek@freescale.com'
	Cc: 'sv-ac@server.eda-stds.org'; Korchemny, Dmitry
	Subject: RE: [sv-ac] notes from SV-AC meeting 2007-09-25
	
	
	

	"integer my_ints[2] = {123, 456};
	always @(posedge clk) begin
	  foreach (my_ints[i]) begin : b1
	    foo[i] <= somefunction(my_ints[i]);
	    a1: assume property (foo[i] != `BAD_VAL);
	  end
	end
	
	The assumptions b1[0].a1 and b1[1].a1 in this example are
logically equivalent to the assumptions in the example below:"
	

		[SB] You wrote  "The assumptions b1[0].a1 and b1[1].a1
in this example ".
		But those names do not exist in "this example". You
could talk about the assumptions created on each iteration.

		[ES] Would this phrasing work?:  

		The assumptions generated by this example are logically
equivalent to the assumptions b1[0].a1 and b1[1].a1 in the example
below:

		 

		 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

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