Re: [sv-ac] RE: proposal for 2732

Shalom,
I think that John's update is OK. It does not bother me that the time step
that is displayed automatically as part of $error ("the simulation run
time") is also 90 because engineers who analyze the cause of the error at
that time will look at the conditions in the previous time steps. We're
used to that, as often all types of error messages are always around the
location of the error message. This is true for compilation errors and
simulation errors.
I vote for YES on that change.
Ben Cohen

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Bresticker, Shalom <
shalom.bresticker@intel.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> If $error is executed at time 90, then the time step that is displayed
> automatically as part of $error ("the simulation run time") is also 90? That
> doesn't seem to give a friendly, intuitive behavior to the user.
>
> Thanks,
> Shalom
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On
> > Behalf Of Havlicek John-R8AAAU
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 7:15 AM
> > To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
> > Subject: [sv-ac] proposal for 2732
> >
> > Hi Folks:
> >
> > I've uploaded a proposal for 2732 in Mantis. Please see the files
> > uploaded to the Mantis item.
> >
> > J.H.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
>

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