> 2. Currently covergroups are not allowed within procedural blocks, while properties, sequences, and assertions are. In addition, Erik is working on 1995 to allow assertions within procedural loops. Given that checkers would be allowed within procedural blocks and loops as well, will this cause problems for covergroups in a checker, which is instantiated in a procedural loop? I don't think the loops in particular should be an issue: assuming our checkers-in-loops proposal ends up with the same language as our 1995 assertions-in-loops proposal, the checker will be executed for each loop iterator value, but not really be executing in a looped procedural manner. The bigger challenge is probably just the fundamental issue of covergroups in procedural code. I'm not sure that's a show-stopper issue though: it's already the case that concurrent assertions appear in procedural code, but are not 'real' procedural objects, so this may be similar. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Nov 29 10:03:35 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 29 2007 - 10:03:48 PST