|
|
@ -47,9 +47,9 @@ begin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- This is flawed variant of the former assertion |
|
|
|
-- because even in cycle 1 the b before a property has |
|
|
|
-- to hold, which is clearly what we want |
|
|
|
-- to hold, which is clearly not what we want |
|
|
|
-- This assertion doesn't hold at cycle 1 |
|
|
|
-- Furthermore this assertion leads to a GHDL crash with bug report |
|
|
|
-- Furthermore this assertion leads to a GHDL synthesis crash with bug report |
|
|
|
-- BEFORE_3_a : assert always (a -> (b before a)); |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- This assertion should hold but does not at cycle 3 |
|
|
@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ begin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- This assertion should hold but does not at cycle 9 |
|
|
|
-- Potential GHDL bug? |
|
|
|
BEFORE_5_a : assert always (c -> next (d before_ c)); |
|
|
|
BEFORE_5_a : assert always (c -> next (d before_ c)); |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- This assertion doesn't at cycle 6 |
|
|
|
BEFORE_6_a : assert always (e -> next (f before_ e)); |
|
|
|