RE: [sv-ec] inline constraints -- things are not really quite right yet (perhaps)

Ray,

[Jonathan]
> > As a convenience feature, I would also suggest that
> > *anything* with a local:: qualifier should be treated as a 
> > state variable for the constraint, so that (as I suggested in 
> > an earlier post)
> > 
> >   c.randomize() with {x != local::c.x;}; 
> > 
> > would unambiguously mean "randomize c.x so that it gets a 
> > value different from its present value".

[Ray]
> This would be a nice convenience. However, it would be better if
> this feature was also available in a regular constraint (inside
> the class) rather than just in inline-constraints.

On reflection I completely agree that it would be a mistake
to confuse the name-resolution meaning of "local::" with this
treat-as-state behaviour.  Do you feel it's appropriate to 
create a new Mantis proposing a system pseudo-function
(maybe $read_only(), to mimic the similar thing in 'e')
for grabbing the pre-randomization value of an expression
for use as state in a constraint?  Or should we put it
to one side, because there is too much else to do?  
It's a feature that I sorely miss in SV constraints 
in comparison with 'e'...
-- 
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.