Given the conflicting needs
for a SystemVerilog-compatible approach, and for
additional real-valued functionality, I wonder whether a 2-pronged
approach
would work:
a) mothball wreal at the LRM 2.2 level
b) implement a new type that doesn't have backward compatibility
issues, and
does have SystemVerilog-compatible properties
c) when SystemVerilog/AMS becomes a reality (say 2.5 years from now),
leave
wreal in the AMS subsystem to support users but don't attempt to
migrate it
to full SystemVerilog status
It wasn't clear to me from the meeting whether Synopsys had a concrete
proposal
for (b), or were just concerned about the problems introduced by
changing wreal
to having 4-state attributes.
--ian
----------------------------------
Ian M Wilson
Architect
Berkeley Design Automation
Office: 408-496-6600 x238
Cell: 714-272-7040
ian.wilson@berkeley-da.com
http://www.berkeley-da.com
----------------------------------
True SPICE accuracy, 5X-20X faster
Don't Be Left Behind!
----------------------------------
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by
MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Thu Mar 18 15:21:06 2010