nizam.ahmed Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Folks, In SystemC multi-ports, one could access the sc_interface methods of specific port instance using operator  overloaded method. Was there any reason to not have had C++ method in sc_port to allow access to individual port instances? For example, Assume I have a port declaration like. sc_port<some_interface_type, 4> p; I have to ensure the bind order so that the ports are bound correctly. For example, p.bind(some_module.first_export); p.bind(some_module.second_export); p.bind(some_module.third_export); p.bind(some_module.fourth_export); Assume that we introduce a method named at(int index) in sc_port, that returns the sc_port instance for the index, then one could have performed bindings as follows (essentially, the order of binding is no more significant). p.at(2).bind(some_module.third_export); p.at(1).bind(some_module.second_export); p.at(0).bind(some_module.first_export); p.at(3).bind(some_module.fourth_export); I have some of the binds captured in meta-data format( IPXACT) and my parser would not always return the bind in the sequence that the current SystemC expects. Having a _at_ method would have helped. Any thoughts/suggestions/comments? BR/Nizam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.