From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2003-04-01T18:46:05+09:00
Subject: Re: Announce: RHDL-0.4.2 (UsersGuide updated)

In article <b6adov02gsc@enews4.newsguy.com>,
Phil Tomson <ptkwt@shell1.aracnet.com> wrote:
>In article <4073f87c.0303311341.72931c07@posting.google.com>,
>Craig Selton <craigselton@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>I kind of see your point, but on the other hand after reading the
>>explanation I can kind of see how that particular process with wait
>>works.  I'm not sure how you would use that behavior in a real life
>>model (I would have to think about it) but I suppose it might be nice
>>to have that option.  So I'm not sure I would disallow the use of wait
>>inside of a process with a sensitivity list.
>
>Well, I looked at it this morning and found that it would be very 
>difficult to disallow wait statements in processes with sensitivity 
>lists... and, as you mention, perhaps someone would actually find this a 
>useful 'feature'.  So, I'll just deal with it in the documentation ("You 
>can use wait statements in a process with a sensitivity list, but the 
>results may not be what you expect.  It is probably best to use wait 
>statements only in a process without a sensitivity list but this is not 
>enforced by RHDL.")
>

I just updated the RHDL User's Guide with this info.  I also added more 
info about creating and simulating designs.

http://www.aracnet.com/~ptkwt/ruby_stuff/RHDL/UsersGuide.html

NOTE: the wait_for method described in the docs is not yet implemented in 
the 0.4.2 version - I'll include it in 0.4.3 to be released in a week or 
so.

Phil