RE: [sv-bc] Stu's QUESTIONS and NOTES in Draft 4

I thought about that, but I think it's OK the way it is.

It is just an example.  If someone cares about it enough,

I'm sure no one would object to a Mantis and proposal.

 

Thanks,

Doug

 

From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 12:21 PM
To: Warmke, Doug; sv-bc@server.eda.org
Cc: SV-CC
Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Stu's QUESTIONS and NOTES in Draft 4

 

It sounds like the following text should change as well:

The svDpiVersion() function returns a string indicating which DPI
standard is supported by the simulator

and in particular which canonical value representation is being
provided. For example, a tool that is based on

IEEE Std 1800-2005, i.e., the VPI-based canonical value, must return the
string "1800-2005"

Shalom

 

	I.9.1.3  I think we should change the comment to read as
follows:

	/*

	 * Returns one of the following version strings:

	 * "1800-2008"

	 * "1800-2005"

	 * "SV3.1a"

	 */

	const char* svDpiVersion();

	 

	I filed Mantis 2101 and uploaded a proposal for this one.

	SV-CC should add this to their list of items at the next
meeting.

	(It's trivial)

	 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.