Michael, > The problem is that we want to trigger coverage from > within assertions using data in assertion local variables. I too have observed exactly this requirement in several applications. Thus far, I've worked around it in the obvious-but-inelegant way. However, I think it probably makes more sense to use the existing class machinery to build a suitable wrapper class, with a sample() method (written as a task so that it's legitimate to call it from within an assertion) that does all the necessary business of copying its arguments to data members of the coverage wrapper class and then calling the real coverage group's sample() method. In other words, I'd be reluctant to add a new language feature to support something that can rather easily be done in the existing language, especially at this late stage in the development of 1800-2008. On the other hand, building a class that's specifically designed to be a wrapper for a covergroup most emphatically *does* raise interesting questions about extensibility of covergroups and coverpoints. -- Jonathan Bromley, Consultant DOULOS - Developing Design Know-how VHDL * Verilog * SystemC * e * Perl * Tcl/Tk * Project Services Doulos Ltd. Church Hatch, 22 Market Place, Ringwood, Hampshire, BH24 1AW, UK Tel: +44 (0)1425 471223 Email: jonathan.bromley@doulos.com Fax: +44 (0)1425 471573 Web: http://www.doulos.com The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the views of Doulos Ltd., unless specifically stated. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Sat Oct 13 02:37:15 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Oct 13 2007 - 02:37:52 PDT