[ibis-macro] Re: BIRD 121.1 discussion
- From: "Ken Willis" <kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'IBIS-ATM'" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 07:03:19 -0400
Hi Arpad,
I agree with you that the most straightforward approach is to simply specify
the full path. Users would go in and set this once for their project.
I also don't see the real need for DLL_Path at all. When the user assigns an
AMI model in their project, the tool already has to know the path to the
DLL. Looking locally (in the same directory as the DLL) for supporting files
should be default behavior anyway for the DLL. If the specific model has a
bunch of supporting files in some specific directory structure, then you can
easily use a Model_Specific parameter to point to some "other_stuff"
directory where it will find those supporting files. But that is a
Model_Specific thing. We don't have to make it a universal keyword.
So to me we already have all the support needed in the spec to handle this.
We need to stop inventing new Reserved_Parameters all the time to do things
we can already do. The spec is getting complicated enough as-is, and new
Reserved_Parameters should be added only when needed. I don't think we need
to in this case.
Thanks,
Ken Willis
Sigrity, Inc.
860-871-7070
kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 10:31 AM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] BIRD 121.1 discussion
Hello,
We were running out of time yesterday, so I didn't
continue with my question, but I still feel that
my question was not answered adequately about
DLL_Path.
It was stated that for the model it is irrelevant
whether this is a relative or full path.
It was also stated that relative paths don't work
when different parts of the project are on different
drives, so if an EDA tool passes a relative path
to the DLL in such a situation it should be considered
a bug.
Having said that, we do we want to put in the spec
the option of passing a relative path to the model?
Why shouldn't the spec say full path only?
I feel if we put relative path in the spec, we are
opening the door for the EDA vendors to write bugs.
Are we really trying to encourage that?
Could someone please explain why it is necessary to
put relative path in the spec if it opens the
possibility for problems?
Thanks,
Arpad
======================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/
IBIS Macro reflector: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts:
