[ibis-macro] Re: BIRD121.1 - Questions/Comments?
- From: "Walter Katz" <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <milabont@xxxxxxxxx>, "'IBIS-ATM'" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:43:52 -0400 (EDT)
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
Other related posts:
