Some simulators provide an option to mask specific warning types because the user decides they can be safely ignored. I wouldn't want to address this EACH time we mention warnings, but if we say "Shall issue a warning" and the implemention allows the user to hide it, it still conforms to the spec, right? [ the warning was issued, but the user masked it, so he didn't see it.. ] IMO, this would be acceptable. Jonathan Davidj.david@ieee.org jb_david@yahoo.com http://ieee-jbdavid.blogspot.com Mobile 408 390 2425 Work: jbdavid@scintera.com http://www.scintera.com 408 200-7024 ----- Original Message ---- From: "Bresticker, Shalom" <shalom.bresticker@intel.com> To: Geoffrey.Coram <Geoffrey.Coram@analog.com> Cc: verilog-AMS LRM Committee <verilog-ams@eda.org> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2006 3:17:50 AM Subject: RE: Question on absdelay It is. "may" issue a warning is redundant, since it is optional, and a tool can issue a warning whenever it wants, unless LRM specifically says that it shall not issue a warning. But such a statement gives the idea to tool developers and to users. "shall" issue a warning is also allowed in LRM. An example is in 1364-2005, 12.3.9.3. Shalom > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-verilog-ams@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-verilog- > ams@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Geoffrey.Coram > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 3:03 PM > To: Sri Chandra > Cc: Dave Miller; verilog-AMS LRM Committee > Subject: Re: Question on absdelay > > I have no objection to the proposed change. > > I recall a number of issues in 1364 where the simulator > "may" issue a warning or "shall" issue a warning, so > I believe it is OK to mandate such things in the LRM. > > -Geoffrey > > > Sri Chandra wrote: > > > > In my understanding that was the consensus - if td and maxdelay are > > specified in absdelay, then td can vary but cannot be greater than > > maxdelay value and if it does we will take maxdelay value (with a > > warning probably). > > > > Not sure whether we talk about warnings in the LRM. We refer to error > or > > not, but i need to check that. > > > > cheers, > > SriReceived on Thu Oct 5 09:10:09 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 05 2006 - 09:10:22 PDT