Jump to content

UVM factory usage recommendation inconsistent with base class implementation.

Recommended Posts

The usage section of the factory documentation recommends a specific pattern for creating components parameterized by type

However, uvm_sequence_item::type_name is not defined.  Therefore defining a type based on the uvm_sequence_item, following this recommendation will result in a compilation error.  I have put together an example illustrating this: https://www.edaplayground.com/x/3N_9

Parameterization on uvm_sequence_item is one example, I would suggest that parameterization on base classes is allowed and they have type_name defined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...