Re: gEDA: Icarus Verilog 20010121 Snapshot

[Steve Wilson <stevew-at-NOSPAMintrinsix_dot_com>]

No I haven't. There are a couple tests that XL doesn't pass ;-) though some of
them have to do with V2K+1 standard as oppossed to spec compliance. You DID know
that XL isn't IEEE compliant didn't you? ;-)  NC does a better job.

Steve

mcmahill@mtl.mit.edu wrote:

> have you run this on verilog-xl or modelsim lately?  Just curious as to
> how Icarus Verilog stacks up there.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Steve Wilson wrote:
>
> > I've seen chips going to production that didn't have coverage numbers this
> > good ;-)
> >
> > I guess we'll just have to write more tests!
> >
> > Steve Wilson
> >
> > mcmahill@mtl.mit.edu wrote:
> >
> > > 2 things.  I've attached diffs to the solaris package files for 0.6.
> > >
> > > as far as the testsuite, its at:
> > >
> > > Tests passed: 414, Parse Errors: 0, Unsupported: 0, failed execution, 16,
> > > crashed: 0, C compiler err: 17 total: 456
> > >
> > > Tests passed: 414, Parse Errors: 0, Unsupported: 0, failed execution, 16,
> > > crashed: 0, C compiler err: 17 total: 456
> > >
> > > for solaris-sparc and netbsd-alpha.  Hey, 414/456 is 90.8%, not too
> > > shabby.
> > >
> > > -dan
> > >
> >