Re: Static connections to input ports

> For this type of the continuous port connections, I would treat this
> value (3.1) as a potential contribution w.r.t. ground since every
> continuous discipline has a potential nature (conservative or
> signal-flow) and the flow nature is optional.

This is actually an error introduced into the LRM at some point. The
original specification stated that a signal-flow discipline contained
one nature, and it could be either the potential or the flow nature.

The way the LRM currently reads is problematic because it prevents one
from properly using flow type quantities as signal-flow variables.
Consider trying to model the current output of a transconductance
amplifier using signal flow ports. In the way the LRM is currently
written, the current would be considered a potential, which means that
you could not connect it to any electrical component such as a resistor
because the current output of the amplifier would be treated by the
resistor as a voltage.

> I treat wreal as just another discrete net type (i.e. wire). The
> only difference I see is that wreal nets have a few more restriction
> than the other net types. Declaring a discrete discipline with a
> wreal net type can be very useful in a design, particularly when
> 2 wreal nets need to be incompatible with each other.
> 
> I think the discipline resolution and connect module should not be
> limited to discrete and continuous, instead it should expand to
> handled an 2 incompatible nets regardless of domain.

This would be a great addition to the language. It is currently very
annoying that one cannot connect a wreal port to an electrical net.

-Ken