Re: [sv-ec] Re: [sv-bc] coverage_type_option_assignment

The "not in Annex A" specialization style is used in a dozen syntax
boxes in the SV LRM.  Where's an example of the italicized prefix style
in the SV LRM?

-- Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org] On Behalf Of Paul
Graham
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 10:47 AM
To: Arturo.Salz@synopsys.COM
Cc: swapnaj@cadence.com; Neil.Korpusik@Sun.com; sv-ec@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ec] Re: [sv-bc] coverage_type_option_assignment

> Option assignment syntax is not in the BNF because syntactically these

> statements are just blocking assignments to struct members whose name 
> is "option". The corresponding data structures are defined in section
18.9.

I was confused because a covergroup can be declared in the concurrent
part of a module, while the option assignments can only occur in a
procedural region.  Yet in the examples the covergroup and its option
assignments appear to be in the same region.

Syntax box 18-6 can be clarified by following the style used elsewhere
in the lrm for redundant syntax:

   <i>cover_type_option_</i>blocking_assignment := ...

Then there is no need for the enigmatic "not in Annex A".

Paul