Subject: Re: [D]SPF for back-annotation?
From: Pragmatic C Software (sjmeyer@pragmatic-c.com)
Date: Fri Feb 02 2001 - 18:01:06 PST
Why not use SDF? It is already supported by every Verilog simulator and the
infr-structure of programs for handling name conflicts, etc exists.
It is extensible. There also are some new features for Verilog 2000
that allow annotating to procedural behavioral code so extensions to allow
annotating to analog blocks and spice should not be too hard.
/Steve
Quoting Kevin Cameron x3251 (Kevin.Cameron@nsc.com):
>
> I was wondering how familiar folks are with [D]SPF, and
> how we could use it for back annotation. Since SPF is
> (more or less) Spice netlist, and Verilog-A is supposed
> to be able to support all that stuff, it shouldn't be
> to hard to specifiy a usage model and possible extensions
> to the SPF writers.
>
> The problems with using SPF probably lie in the name-mapping
> area and that SPF is usually flat - but I'm sure we can come
> up with a workable interface if we think about it a bit :-)
>
> Anybody got objections to using [D]SPF?
>
> Kev.
>
> --
> National Semiconductor
> 2900 Semiconductor Drive, Mail Stop D3-677, Santa Clara, CA 95052-8090
-- Steve Meyer sjmeyer@pragmatic-c.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Feb 02 2001 - 18:04:57 PST