Subject: Re: Assertion Minutes 3/28/02
From: Peter Flake (flake@co-design.com)
Date: Wed Apr 03 2002 - 12:42:28 PST
At 11:04 AM 4/2/02 -0500, Tom Fitzpatrick wrote:
>Vote 1:
>Data to be required in default message
>a) assertion hierarchical name
Yes
>b) file/line of assertion statement
Yes
>c) simulation time at which assertion fails
Yes
>d) simulation time at which assertion is executed
No
>Vote 2:
>Should there be a standard string embedded in all assertion status messages,
>such as:
> "Assertion [<name>] (<file>:<line>) failed at time <time>. "
>NOTE: Some tools have their own standard format for reporting file/line
>information and severity for messages.
No
>Vote 3:
>Should the printing of a message be controlled by a command line switch.
>Proposal:
>[Immediate Assertions section] change "If the else is omitted a default
>error message is written if the assertion fails." to "If the else is
>omitted, a default error message is written if the assertions fails unless a
>command-line option is enabled to suppress it."
Yes. This is equivalent to making the default severity warning.
>Vote 4:
>If Vote 3 passes, is $quiet still required?
No
>Vote 5:
>Should there be a complement of each approved system function?
>i.e., since we passed $onehot, should there be $onecold?
>NOTE: You must vote either for ALL functions to have a complement or for
>NONE to have a complement.
Abstain
>Vote 6:
>For $inset/$member, which matching semantics should be used?
>a) exact match ($inset)
Yes
>b) use casex semantics ($insetx)
Yes
>c) use casez semantics ($insetz)
>
yes
>Vote 7:
>Should Antecedent/Consequent be postponed until SystemVerilog 3.1 to allow
>time to resolve semantic issues with VFV committee?
>--------------------------------------------
Abstain
Peter.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 12:45:27 PST