Re: [sv-ec] Randomizing size of associative arrays

As long as we assume that any growing or shrinking happens on the right-hand 
side, then sure - fine with me. Of course, allowing queues means that 17.4 must 
be modified as well.

--Mike

Rich, Dave wrote:
> Is it possible that this should have said queue instead of associative
> array? I can't think of any why a queue couldn't be resized by
> randomize?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Michael Burns
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 12:07 PM
> To: Bresticker, Shalom
> Cc: Ryan, Ray; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-ec] Randomizing size of associative arrays
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Mantis 2113 has been created for this with proposal doc uploaded.
> 
> --Mike
> 
> Michael Burns wrote:
>> Thanks - I hadn't found that thread. I've also just found the Mantis 
>> (889), which escaped me even though it's marked all over the draft in 
>> 17.4... perhaps I'm going colorblind and can no longer see red.
>>
>> Anyway, there's still the issue of the inconsistency with 17.5.7,
> which 
>> says that you _can_ constrain the size of an associative array. It
> looks 
>> like all we need is a fix to that section:
>>
>> In D4 sec. 17.5.7, p.393, paragraph 6, change:
>>
>>   "The size method of a dynamic or associative array can be used to 
>> constrain the size of the array"
>>
>> to:
>>
>>   "The size method of a dynamic array can be used to constrain the
> size 
>> of the array"
>>
>> Does this sound reasonable?
>>
>> --Mike
>>
>> Bresticker, Shalom wrote:
>>> There was a long email thread on this starting at
>>> http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ec/hm/3293.html , started by a guy named
> Ray
>>> Ryan.
>>>
>>> Shalom
>>>  
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
> 
>>>> On Behalf Of Ryan, Ray
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 10:12 PM
>>>> To: Michael Burns; sv-ec@server.eda.org
>>>> Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Randomizing size of associative arrays
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In section 17.4 (Random Variable), there are two consecutive
> bullets.
>>>>  - Dynamic and associative arrays can be declared rand or randc. All
> 
>>>> of the elements in the array are randomized, overwriting any
> previous 
>>>> data.
>>>>
>>>>  - The size of a dynamic array declared as rand or randc can also be
> 
>>>> constrained. ...
>>>>
>>>> This explicitly allows associative arrays to be declared as random 
>>>> variable. The second bullet only allows size constraints on dynamic 
>>>> array. As consecutive points, it seems clear that constraining the 
>>>> size of an associative array is not allowed.
>>>> I believe there was some earlier discussion on this and that the 
>>>> ommission of associative arrays was intentional.
>>>>
>>>> - Ray
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org
>>>>> [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Michael Burns
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 6:35 PM
>>>>> To: sv-ec@server.eda.org
>>>>> Subject: [sv-ec] Randomizing size of associative arrays
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it intended to be able to constrain and randomize the size of an
> 
>>>>> associative array? Draft 4 sec. 17.4 p385 paragraph 3 talks about 
>>>>> constraining the size of a dynamic array, but not an associative 
>>>>> array. In the absence of any other language, one would naturally 
>>>>> assume that the intention was not to allow constraining the 
>>>> size of an
>>>>> associative array. However, section 17.5.7 p.393 paragraph 
>>>> 6 uses very
>>>>> similar language, but does include associative arrays. If 
>>>> the intent
>>>>> is to allow randomizing the size of an associative array, 
>>>> I'd like to
>>>>> hear how it was supposed to work - I'm having trouble imagining 
>>>>> anything useful, particularly for non-integral index types. On the 
>>>>> other hand, it would certainly be useful for associative array 
>>>>> randomization to preserve existing size and indices, and only 
>>>>> randomize the values.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there's a mantis on this already, I'd like to address it in this
> 
>>>>> round. If not, I'd like to know so I can submit one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by 
>>>>> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by 
>>>> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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.