Subject: Re: 1364.1 pragmas
From: Paul Graham (pgraham@Cadence.COM)
Date: Tue Sep 03 2002 - 19:33:31 PDT
Regarding attribute "domains", is it likely that different domains of use
will require homonymous attributes with different meanings? Is it likely
that the synthesis "fullcase" attribute will collide with a "fullcase"
attribute in another domain that means something other than "this case
statement has all the choices specified"? Is it likely that "one_hot" will
ever refer to something other than a coding scheme? Will "black_box" mean
something other than an instantiation of an unknown module?
One good way to answer these rhetorical questions is to ask some experts in
formal verification and simulation to see if they already use pragmas or
other directives which conflict with existing synthesis attributes.
The 1364.1 committee looked at existing synthesis pragmas and found only 15
to convert into pragmas. While there are other pragmas in use which do not
appear as attributes in the 1361.1 document, the fact is that the synthesis
pragma name space is extremely sparse. If the pragma name spaces from other
domains are as sparse, then attribute name collisions among domains will be
very unlikely.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Sep 03 2002 - 19:40:25 PDT