Re: Errors from process control methods

I'm ok with consistency at a minimum, and I agree that prior to start of
simulation they should also be a problem.

My point on error vs warning is "Why would a user issue a reset prior to
simulation if it was not going to have an effect?". I think if I write code
to do something (e.g. reset), then I expect it to occur. If it's not
possible to do at the point I try, then I would like to be notified very
overtly of my erroneous thinking. Thus I think it is an error.

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Bishnupriya Bhattacharya <
bpriya@cadence.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> It should be the same for both. I prefer a warning in both cases, but am ok
> with error in both cases also.
>
> -Bishnupriya
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* john.aynsley@doulos.com [mailto:john.aynsley@doulos.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, December 03, 2010 10:49 AM
> *To:* Bishnupriya Bhattacharya
> *Cc:* john.aynsley@doulos.com; P1666 Technical WG
>
> *Subject:* RE: Errors from process control methods
>
> All,
>
> The thing is, if we made(e.g) reset() or kill() to be errors during a
> pause, why would they not be errors before the start of simulation? It seems
> rather ad hoc.
>
> John A
>
>
> -----Bishnupriya Bhattacharya <bpriya@cadence.com> wrote: -----
>
> To: "john.aynsley@doulos.com" <john.aynsley@doulos.com>, "
> systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org" <systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org>
> From: Bishnupriya Bhattacharya <bpriya@cadence.com>
> Date: 12/02/2010 08:44AM
> Subject: RE: Errors from process control methods
>
> John,
>
> Good catch. I would prefer a warning over error, but can also live with an
> error.
>
> Thanks,
> -Bishnupriya
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* john.aynsley@doulos.com [mailto:john.aynsley@doulos.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 02, 2010 2:03 AM
> *To:* Bishnupriya Bhattacharya; systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org
> *Subject:* Errors from process control methods
>
> Bishnupriya, All,
>
> I have just noticed an inconsistency. When discussing sc_pause, we recently
> decided "it shall be an error" to call kill, reset, or throw_it while
> simulation is paused. But a while back, after some discussion, we decided
> that calling such methods from the wrong context, such as during
> elaboration, would not be an error but would have no effect other than
> optionally generating a warning.
>
> So my question is, should the same apply when paused, i.e just an optional
> warning?
>
> Thanks
>
> John A
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
>

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