Re: [sv-bc] Is #4.2step legal?

From: Clifford E. Cummings <cliffc_at_.....>
Date: Fri May 12 2006 - 10:21:46 PDT
Hi, All -

At 10:07 AM 5/12/2006, Brad Pierce wrote:
>Then why not allow only #1step?

I have no objection to this de-hancement!

Does anybody have a good reason for using #2step or greater?

Regards - Cliff


> >I already
> >tell people that there is no known good reason to use a step value
> >other than #1step and that using #2step or greater opens the door to
> >potential race conditions.
>
>-- Brad

----------------------------------------------------
Cliff Cummings - Sunburst Design, Inc.
14314 SW Allen Blvd., PMB 501, Beaverton, OR 97005
Phone: 503-641-8446 / FAX: 503-641-8486
cliffc@sunburst-design.com / www.sunburst-design.com
Expert Verilog, SystemVerilog, Synthesis and Verification Training
Received on Fri May 12 10:21:37 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 12 2006 - 10:21:43 PDT