On Jan 8, 2012, at 6:49 AM, Walter F.J. Mueller wrote: > From all that I conclude that the sdf parser in ghdl seems to have > some problems with the proper treatment of RNUMBER and rtriple and > seems to require rtriple's even though the SDF spec clearly does not > require that.
I haven't generated a flow chart on what ghdl does but I believe you're on to something here, from the analysis of the 9597 bug I just did. It turns out that the usage (which rvalue) has to be determined from context in any event. I'd stop short of claiming that the behavior exhibited isn't 'proper treatement'. It's just not the marketplace norm. (And SDF 3.0 could modify that view). The rvalue to VitalDelayType* mapping is only one sided in it's view of dealing with the different number of rvalues. It can be made to take both directions into consideration instead of just SDF side (and it's consumption side driven anyway). Thanks for the new bug report. _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
