[sv-cc] Assertion "and" and "or" operators in VPI

Charles has pointed out to me that we have an
abundance of "and" and "or" operators already in
vpi_user.h.  Could we reuse a pair of those?  But
which ones?  In 1364, the lexical token "or" corresponds
to a vpiEventOrOp, while the vpiLogicAndOp and
vpiLogicOrOp correspond to special symbols.  If
we reuse 1364 #define's for "and" and "or", we probably
do need a note saying which ones.

Regards,
Jim V.

--------------------------------------------------------- 
James H. Vellenga                            978-262-6381 
Engineering Director                   (FAX) 978-262-6636 
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.         vellenga@cadence.com 
270 Billerica Rd 
Chelmsford, MA 01824-4179 
"We all work with partial information." 
---------------------------------------------------------- 
  
 

] -----Original Message-----
] From: Bassam Tabbara [mailto:Bassam@novas.com] 
] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 5:44 PM
] To: Jim Vellenga; Duncan, Ralph; SV-CC
] Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Proposal uploaded for 487
] 
] Hey Jim, some good catches here ... As we discussed before the aim
] should be to delete the notes, so no sense in "correcting" those of
] course, but yeah some things are missing see section (2) below.
] 
] 1) No changes if notes deleted:
] vpiIfOp / vpiIfElseOp     ---> should be (vpi_user.h) vpiIf and
] vpiIfElse so no fix needed here if deleted I think ...
] 
] vpiMultiConcat  ---> vpiMultiConcatOp  (no comment on the existence or
] lack of Op !).
] 
] vpiDelayedImplyOp is really vpiNonOverlapImplyOp  
] (vpiOverlapImplyOp can
] be used in same places too...).
] 
] 2) To ADD in sv_vpi_user.h (used in sequence/property composition)
] 	A) vpiOr or vpiOrOp (latter better)
] 	B) vpiAndOp 
] 	C) vpiUnboundedConst  (this is $)
] 	D) vpiAssertion      (32.31)
] 
] Thx.
] -Bassam.
] 
] --
] Dr. Bassam Tabbara
] Architect, R&D
] Novas Software Inc.
] (408) 467-7893
] 
] -----Original Message-----
] From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On 
] Behalf Of Jim
] Vellenga
] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:01 PM
] To: Duncan, Ralph; SV-CC
] Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Proposal uploaded for 487
] 
] Curious,
] 
] For Note 2 of 32.34, which we're proposing to move:
] 
] vpi_user.h has a #define for vpiNotOp.
] 
] sv_vpi_user.h defines vpiImplyOp.
] 
] But I don't see a #define in either for vpiDelayedImplyOp, vpiAndOp,
] vpiOrOp, vpiIfOp, or vpiIfElseOp.  Can anyone else confirm or 
] disconfirm
] this?
] 
] Was there a ballot issue on this?
] 
] And since I'm pulling on this thread, No1e 1 in 32.36 also 
] has vpiAndOp
] and vpiOr (instead of vpiOrOp).  The others from that note do 
] appear in
] sv_vpi_user.h.
] However, sv_vpi_user.h also defines vpiOverlapImplyOp and
] vpiNonOverlapImplyOp, which are _not_ used anywhere else in the
] standard!
] 
] And while Note 1 of 32.39 -- as well as the corresponding note in the
] 1364 draft standard -- refer to vpiMultiConcat, the actual 
] definition in
] vpi_user.h is vpiMultiConcatOp.
] 
] Annoying.
] 
] If someone else confirms, I'll put in a Mantis item.
] 
] Regards,
] Jim Vellenga
] 
] --------------------------------------------------------- 
] James H. Vellenga                            978-262-6381 
] Engineering Director                   (FAX) 978-262-6636 
] Cadence Design Systems, Inc.         vellenga@cadence.com 
] 270 Billerica Rd
] Chelmsford, MA 01824-4179
] "We all work with partial information." 
] ---------------------------------------------------------- 
]   
]  
] 
] ] -----Original Message-----
] ] From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On 
] ] Behalf Of Duncan, Ralph
] ] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 7:04 PM
] ] To: SV-CC
] ] Subject: [sv-cc] Proposal uploaded for 487
] ] 
] ] 487: mentioning operand order for property-expression operations. 
] ] 
] ] I've uploaded a proposal that moves the text as suggested.  
] It is not 
] ] clear whether this really gains anything. 
] ] 
] ] Ralph 
] ] 
] ] 
] 
] 
] 
]