Re: Frequency Domain and Noise Domain

Dear all,
First, I would like to thank you all for pointing out this. I would like to
apologize for all of you. May be what I did because I didn't find another
forum or mail-list that deal with VHDL-AMS. But with the site sent by Marq
bole, this would be a very good forum to work in.

After  I appologized, I just want to point out that the last topic was
deeply involving VHDL-AMS standard. I was discussing the issue of how the
VHDL-AMS should handle different definitions of the element depending on the
domain of analysis while only availiable domains is : Frequency Domain,
Quiescent domain or transient domain. While all doesn't involve noise.
Let's look at a typical example, we all know the resistor. we know that a
resistor network in AC analysis will give just a flat output. While in noise
there are noise effects which will appear with proper modelling.

Finally, I want to appologize again for discussing an issue not in the
approperiate place, thank you for helping.

Best regards,
Amro Tork
On 3/20/06, Alain Vachoux <alain.vachoux@epfl.ch> wrote:
>
> Marq,
>
> > As a suggestion, there is an excellent Forum on Ken Kundert's Designer's
> > Guide website (www.designers-guide.org/Forum) with a lot of traffic on
> > both design/simulation related issues, as well as language design. There
> > is even a specific VHDL-AMS section on the forum with all VHDL-AMS
> > related discussions:
> >
> >         http://www.designers-guide.org/Forum/YaBB.pl?board=vhdlams
>
> Thanks for pointing us to Ken's web site. I think this is an excellent
> suggestion.
>
> > By the way, I do think the discussion of the last weeks has been
> > insightful for language discussions as well: if a feature is missing, is
> > that a tool vendor's problem, or should the standardization community
> > also be involved. Sometimes a solution chosen as elegant and efficient
> > from a language design point of view might fail to connect with the
> > user's view on that particular solution. That's not something that an
> > ordinary user is able (or willing) to analyse and distinguish -- the
> > user has a problem and it needs to be solved. If it turns out to be a
> > vendor/tool related issue, we can still ask the discussion to be moved
> > to, for instance, the Designer's Guide forum.
>
> I share your point of view. I can understand that it might not be always
> obvious to figure out if a particular issue is relevant to the language
> definition, to the use of the language related to modeling issues or to
> its implementation in a tool.
> There is no claim that the current VHDL-AMS language definition is
> definitive and is addressing all possible needs. It is the charter of
> the working group to bring clarifications, study proposals for changes
> or additions in the language and update the Language Reference Manual
> accordingly (re the WG Operating Procedures document which is available
> on the 1076.1 web site). Clearly, any reference to a particular tool or
> vendor should be avoided. My point is that discussion in the mailing
> list should stay within the WG charter, so anybody willing to contribute
> should be aware of it. The 1076.1 mailing list is not a user forum.
>
> > Regards,
> > Marq Kole
>
> Best regards,
> Alain Vachoux
>