RE: [sv-bc] illegal priority if

I don't think I agree with this. 

As nearly everyone has pointed out, 99.9% of the cases are not
order-dependent, so that all orders give the same results.

The non-onehot uses of unique, using your terminology, are "illegal" (a
poor choice of terms) not because they require non-deterministic
behavior, which they don't, but rather simply because they are not
one-hot. Period.

That is, as Cliff as pointed out, unique is an assertion of one-hot. A
non-onehot use is simply a violation of that assertion.

> We say that non-onehot uses of unique are "illegal" because,
> formally
> speaking, they require non-deterministic simulator behavior,
> which
> cannot be delivered.  The simulator "warns" when it must
> discard an
> alternative simulation control flow.


Shalom