>From: "Bresticker, Shalom" <shalom.bresticker@intel.com> >Is there a sane case where i++ would be used as a unique case_item >expression? Is there a justification for making the tool give it special >treatment, e.g., "do the evaluation in a temporary space for evaluating >uniqueness, and throw the result away if that branch is not the one to >be executed?" We have been using i++ in our examples because it is short and easy to follow. That might make this "temporary evaluation" idea seem deceptively easy. But in general, we need to deal with function calls that could execute arbitrary amounts of procedural code, theoretically capable of changing the value of every variable in the design, forcing every net, launching an arbitrary number of subprocesses, etc. I don't think this idea of throwing away the side effects is feasible in general. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Nov 19 12:40:18 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 19 2007 - 12:40:29 PST