Subject: Re: resolveto statement's discipline list constraint
From: Graham Helwig (ghelwig@asc.corp.mot.com)
Date: Wed Jan 16 2002 - 23:06:40 PST
Hello Kev,
Thanks for you're reply.
Kevin Cameron wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that that is necessary. The 'connect/resolveto' mechanism is
> really just for attribute resolution, and the current ACMI mechanism really just
> converts between views on what is considered (electrically) the same node,
> i.e. continuous (actually piecewise-linear) and discrete (logic) values. It is not
> physically possible to connect nets with different base disciplines such that
> they become one node, so the connect statements above are unnecessary
> because you don't need to do attribute resolution.
>
According to section 8.4 LRM version 2.0 paragraph 1, It clearly
states that the discipline resolution (for both basic and detailed
methods) is performed first to determine the the undeclared net's
discipline, then ACMI is performed to insert converts if required. So
the connect statements above are necessary to to correctly perform ACMI.
Your response highlight an issue with the LRM that is unrelated to this
email thread. Please see the email titled "Alternative approach to
discipline and their compatibility and resolution" for details about
this issue.
Regards
Graham
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Graham Helwig email: A11558@email.mot.com ghelwig@asc.corp.mot.com Telephone:+61-8-81683532 Fax:+61-8-81683501 Motorola Australia Software Centre, 2 Second Avenue, Mawson Lakes, Adelaide, SA, 5095, Australia -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 16 2002 - 23:43:27 PST