RE: P1666 review issues from JEITA

By the way, sorry to ask an OSCI specific question here, but what is the motive
for requiring the user to define that macro to use dynamic process with the OSCI simulator?

Jerome

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org [mailto:owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org] On Behalf Of Philipp A. Hartmann
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:45 AM
To: john.aynsley@doulos.com
Cc: Hiroshi Imai; systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org
Subject: Re: P1666 review issues from JEITA

John,

I agree, that SC_INCLUDE_DYNAMIC_PROCESSES is an artefact of the OSCI
implementation. But in the example on p. 556 the #define is mentioned
in the LRM.

We should probably strip this from the example. If we keep it there, we
should probably explain it somewhere.

Greetings from Oldenburg,
  Philipp

On 11/01/11 12:57, john.aynsley@doulos.com wrote:
[snip]

> 15
> To enable dynamic process, we must define the macro
> "SC_INCLUDE_DYNAMIC_PROCESSES". But the definition and the explanation are
> not given in the LRM. They should be in the LRM.
>
> [JA] The following are definitely features of the OSCI PoC simulator, not
> the IEEE standard
> * SC_INCLUDE_DYNAMIC_PROCESSES
> * SC_INCLUDE_FX
> * SC_FX_EXCLUDE_OTHER
> * SC_DEPRECATION_WARNINGS
> * sc_report_handler::set_actions("/IEEE_Std_1666/deprecated", ...)
> * DEBUG_SYSTEMC
> * SC_SIGNAL_WRITE_CHECK DISABLE

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