Karen specifically said that she preferred not forcing side-effects to occur. She did not mention the other side, but I believe there might be cases where forcing short-circuiting could hurt the quality of synthesis results. However, it seems likely that forcing side-effects would usually be more costly than forcing them not to occur. I believe Karen was thinking of cases where the user would not care if the side-effect did not always occur in the synthesized gate-level netlist. > Karen suggested that synthesis should be free to assume whichever > one it wants. If b is on the critical path, it can choose not to > use it to enable the increment. If b isn't on the critical path, > the tool might choose to use it to enable the increment. Karen > suggested that synthesis tools should be free to do this, to allow > them to give better timing or area. I would suggest that synthesis > should NOT be free to do this, but should give you the hardware > that you intended. ShalomReceived on Thu Aug 17 05:30:56 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 17 2006 - 05:31:20 PDT