Dear All, Recenly I have been reviewing some of the analog features in Verilog-AMS and it struck me that the current distinction between analog operators and system tasks and functions is rather artificial. There are a few analog operators that do not require the specific treatment of the analog filter functions, while there a few system tasks and functions that do. Specifically, the analysis function call and the small-signal AC and noise sources could very well be defined as system functions and tasks. And on the other side $limit is actually an analog filter function with $bound_step and $discontinuity in a kind of gray area. As in LRM 2.3 we have provided system-function syntax to the mathematical operators $sin, $exp, etc, wouldn't it be better to extend this to the analog operators as well? That would allow us to create a more logical grouping of system functions where limexp and $limit would be in one group, and analysis and $simparam would be in another group. The restrictions on analog operators could then be made specific to those system tasks and functions to which it applies - as is currently done for the analog kernel control system functions $limit, $bound_step and $discontinuity. Would there be any clash with $analysis, $ddt, $idt, $idtmod, $ddx, $absdelay, $transition, $slew, $last_crossing, $limexp, $laplace_nd, $zi_nd, or any of the other Laplace and Z-domain functions? Legacy code would be compatible using the same approach as proposed in LRM 2.3 - to use the `begin_keywords and `end_keywords compiler directives. Cheers, Marq Marq Kole Product Manager AMSRF Simulation NXP Semiconductors / Corporate I&T / Design Technology & Flows -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Sep 10 01:17:06 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 10 2009 - 01:17:30 PDT