[ibis-macro] Questions on API proposal

  • From: "Mirmak, Michael" <michael.mirmak@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:10:29 -0700

Looking at the API proposal text, I have two implementation questions:

1) Is [Algorithmic Model] below the level of [Model] in the keyword
hierarchy?  In other words, can an [Algorithmic Model] only be used with
the particular [Model] that contains its definition?

I can imagine circumstances where I might want a single [Algorithmic
Model] definition to be used independently with several different analog
[Model]s (e.g., where the same engine design is used separately to
process data but for two different interfaces).  Under the current
definition, I would have to re-define the [Algorithmic Model] several
times, even if identical, for individual [Model]s, even if they are
associated under [Model Selector] with a single pin.

2) On a related note, does [Algorithmic Model] not accept a text string
argument as an identifier?  Again this implies that defining an
[Algorithmic Model] is explicit under [Model] but instantiating it is
implicit through the [Pin] list.  

This effectively means that each [Algorithmic Model] is only associated
with a single [Model] and therefore a single [Pin].  I can imagine --
and might be interested in creating -- cases where a block of
algorithmic code processes the results of data involving multiple analog
buffers associated with multiple pins.  In this syntax, I have no way of
defining this association, at least not through [Pin], [Model] or any
argument to [Algorithmic Model].  The [Circuit Call] keyword does allow
me, by contrast, to associate a single block of code with multiple pins.

Am I missing something?

- MM

Other related posts: