Mike, A nose by any other name still smells. I will leave it up to the committee to decide what the names should be. The Current Working Directory (CWD) is the CWD for the simulation. Typically, the CWD is the directory where the simulation deck is, although it can be some other directory in the project. DLLPath is the directory where the .ibs file (and .ami and .dll and supporting files) reside. The DLL can find the CWD of the simulation, not the directory where the DLL resides. Walter From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike LaBonte Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 11:36 AM To: IBIS-ATM Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: BIRD121.1 - Questions/Comments? Some BIRD 121.1 comments that come to mind quickly: 1. There is inconsistency in the parameter naming. To be consistent with "Supporting_Files" and most AMI reserved parameters, I think "DLLPath" should be "DLL_Path" and "DLLid" should be "DLL_ID". 2. In the last ATM meeting it sounded like there was an expectation that "DLLPath" would point to the directory that is the CWD (Current Working Directory) for the DLL, and where the IBIS file resides, and also where the Supporting_Files would be found. I may be mistaken. But if not, then since the DLL can find out it's CWD anyway, what is DLLPath really needed for? The description says it is a "string that contains the correct path information for the algorithmic model". I'm not sure what that means. 3. Would "DLLid" require less explanation if it was called "Instance_ID" or "Unique_ID"? 4. Maybe we should have some rules for "DLLid". For example, the character set should be limited to characters suitable for use in file names. Should there also be a maximum character count limitation, maybe 16? This might help if some file names generated using "DLLid" have to appear in other files that have some kind of line or field limitation. Mike On 6/28/11 5:56 PM, "Arpad Muranyi" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Walter, The attached file doesn't seem to be the official BIRD 121.1. I didn't look at the main text, but the header section definitely indicates that it is not. I think we should use the one that is uploaded on the IBIS website as the baseline for our discussions. http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/birds/bird121.1.txt Thanks, Arpad ====================================================== From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 4:26 PM To: IBIS-ATM Subject: [ibis-macro] BIRD121.1 - Questions/Comments? All, BIRD121.1 - Questions/Comments? Walter Walter Katz wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx Phone 303.449-2308 Mobile 720.333-1107