[sv-ac] RE: Proposal for mantis #2955

Hi Erik,

Checkers don't have parameters, and I would say they don't need them (other than for backward compatibility purposes if to implement legacy module-based assertion libraries such as OVL on top of checkers). I would put the comment in the text rather than putting it in the code.

Thanks,
Dmitry

From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Seligman, Erik
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 11:59 PM
To: Tapan Kapoor; sv-ac@server.eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] RE: Proposal for mantis #2955

Maybe rather than the ugly comment, we could just declare clevel as a parameter to make the example legal?

From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Tapan Kapoor
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:27 AM
To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] Proposal for mantis #2955

Team,

I have added proposal for mantis #2955. Please review.

Warm regards,
Tapan
"You must be the change you want to see in the world" : Mahatma Gandhi

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
believed to be clean.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.