Re: sc_pause

John,

I concur with this proposal.
Just a minor remark (my email is flaky today, sorry).

On 22/11/10 18:05, john.aynsley@doulos.com wrote:
[snip]
> We add a recommendation that an application should call sc_stop() from
> sc_main() at the end of simulation, e.g.
> if (sc_get_status() && SC_PAUSED) {

This should probably be a bitwise AND operator.

> SC_REPORT_WARNING(MSGID, "Simulation stopped running from SC_PAUSED");
> sc_stop();
> }

  Within sc_main(), sc_get_status() usually equals SC_PAUSED, right?
Only when returning via an sc_stop (or an error?) within the model,
sc_start would not leave the simulation status in SC_PAUSED.

  I agree, that explicitly calling sc_stop() is good practice before
leaving sc_main(), but a warning seems to indicate an
unwanted/unexpected situation. Maybe, this should be changed to

if( !( sc_get_status() & ( SC_STOPPED | SC_END_OF_SIMULATION ) ) ) {
   SC_REPORT_INFO(MSGID, "Simulation stopped ");
   sc_stop();
}

Greetings from Oldenburg,
  Philipp

[snip]

-- 
Philipp A. Hartmann
Hardware/Software Design Methodology Group
OFFIS Institute for Information Technology
R&D Division Transportation · FuE-Bereich Verkehr
Escherweg 2 · 26121 Oldenburg · Germany · http://offis.de/en/
Phone/Fax: +49-441-9722-420/282 · PGP: 0x9161A5C0 · Skype: phi.har
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.