Re: reset_signal_is variations

I think that's a great idea for consistency and convenience.

------------------------------------------------------
David C Black, XtremeEDA ESL Practice Leader
http://www.Xtreme-EDA.com
(Consulting, Services & Training for all your ESL, verification and DFT needs)
Voice: 512.850.4322 Skype:dcblack FAX: 888.467.4609

On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:25 AM, john.aynsley@doulos.com wrote:

> systemc-2.3.10dec09_beta has the following methods in class sc_module
>
> void reset_signal_is( const sc_in<bool>& , bool );
> void reset_signal_is( const sc_inout<bool>& , bool );
> void reset_signal_is( const sc_out<bool>& , bool );
> void reset_signal_is( const sc_signal_in_if<bool>& , bool );
>
> void async_reset_signal_is( const sc_in<bool>& , bool );
> void async_reset_signal_is( const sc_inout<bool>& , bool );
> void async_reset_signal_is( const sc_out<bool>& , bool );
> void async_reset_signal_is( const sc_signal_in_if<bool>& , bool );
>
> whereas class sc_spawn_options only contains the following subset:
>
> void reset_signal_is( const sc_signal_in_if<bool>& , bool );
> void reset_signal_is( const sc_in<bool>& , bool );
>
> void async_reset_signal_is( const sc_signal_in_if<bool>& , bool );
> void async_reset_signal_is( const sc_in<bool>& , bool )
>
> Do we want to extend sc_spawn_options to include the methods for sc_out and sc_inout?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John A
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.