Subject: Re: Poll on ISSUE 1.1
From: Andrzej Litwiniuk (Andrzej.Litwiniuk@synopsys.com)
Date: Sun Dec 01 2002 - 16:01:03 PST
> I would like to put the proposals on ISSUE 1.1 on poll
> and get a closure on them.
>
> There are two parts for the poll:
>
> a) Joao/John's proposal
> b) Kevin's extension.
My vote is:
a) Abstain
b) No
Comment:
I can see the convenience and the power of that new functionality (C calls SV),
but I simply don't know whether the overhead overweights the benefits of
the richer functionality, or other way round.
I'm afraid of the performance consequences of allowing context-related calls
from C. (My mindset is that of an implementor rather than of a designer.)
Kevin was right that calling a SV function from an instance is similar to
virtual function calls. Actually it's a bit more complicated, since neither
compiler, C nor SV, will be able to statically determine whether a particular
SV function is defined for a particular instance.
So each SV instance will have to provide some info necesssary to verify
whether a SV function is defined for such instance and where is its code.
Note that code cloning resulting from optimizations (if not from module's
parametrization) may cause instance specific addresses of the code.
Regards,
Andrzej
==============================================================================
Andrzej I. Litwiniuk, PhD Principal Engineer VCS R&D
Synopsys, Inc TEL: (508) 263-8056
154 Crane Meadow Road, Suite 300, FAX: (508) 263-8069
Marlboro, MA 01752, USA
==============================================================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Dec 01 2002 - 16:01:51 PST