Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'sc_report'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Accellera Systems Initiative
    • Information
    • Announcements
    • In the News
  • SystemC
    • SystemC Language
    • SystemC AMS (Analog/Mixed-Signal)
    • SystemC TLM (Transaction-level Modeling)
    • SystemC Verification (UVM-SystemC, SCV)
    • SystemC CCI (Configuration, Control & Inspection)
    • SystemC Datatypes
  • UVM (Universal Verification Methodology)
    • UVM 2017 - Methodology and BCL Forum
    • UVM SystemVerilog Discussions
    • UVM Simulator Specific Issues
    • UVM Commercial Announcements
    • UVM (Pre-IEEE) Methodology and BCL Forum
    • UVM 1.2 Public Review
  • Portable Stimulus
    • Portable Stimulus Pre-Release Discussion
    • Portable Stimulus 1.0
  • IP Security
    • IP Security Assurance Whitepaper Discussion
  • IP-XACT
    • IP-XACT Discussion
  • IEEE 1735/IP Encryption
    • IEEE 1735/IP Encryption Discussion
  • OCP (Open Core Protocol)
  • UCIS (Unified Coverage Interoperability Standard)
  • Commercial Announcements
    • Announcements

Categories

  • SystemC
  • UVM
  • UCIS
  • IEEE 1735/IP Encryption

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation


Company

Found 1 result

  1. I am a bit confused about the correct usage of the SC_REPORT_* macros. In "sysc/kernel/sc_simcontext.cpp" we have: SC_REPORT_INFO("/OSCI/SystemC","Simulation stopped by user."); The above is helpful as it produces easily parseable output. Whereas in "sysc/kernel/sc_object_manager.cpp" we have: std::string message = result_orig_string; message += ". Latter declaration will be renamed to "; message += result_string; SC_REPORT_WARNING( SC_ID_INSTANCE_EXISTS_, message.c_str()); This is not so helpful, since it is not clear where the error comes from when analysing output. A quick grep showed that there are a lot of instances where the first argument to a SC_REPORT_* macro is some ID and not the source of the error. Those IDs are resolved to error message strings, which in my opinion should go into the second argument. Could someone please clarify which way is correct? I would like to be able to handle the sc_report messages with our own message handler.
×
×
  • Create New...