#302 No support for out of bound +: in r-value, etc.

[Cary R.]

I can understand that +: may not be supported in an L-value context. I'm not certain synthesis tools support it, but it should be fully supported in a r-value context. The issue I'm having is that for one clock cycle while I'm not looking at the result the index for the +: is out of bounds and covered is crashing. The attached example demonstrates the basic problem. My actual code is significantly more complicated. The advantage to using +: is that it is scalable.

[Cary R.]

Example

[Trevor Williams]

I have attached a bug patch for this issue. There were a lot of changes needed as other types of part selects were also broken with the same issues. The bug fix will be generally available in the next stable release of Covered.

[Trevor Williams]

Bug fix patch for this issue

[Cary R.]

Thanks Trevor,

The select is working as expected. One interesting change when I switch from my workaround to the single statement is that Covered is now reporting a missed line in the controlling state machine. I cannot figure out why the two cases should report different coverage, since this is the controlling state machine. I'll work on creating a test case. I'll also add the my synthesis tool does supports l-value indexed part selects, so I'll likely add a report for that as well.

[SourceForge Robot]

This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was
previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter
did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by
the administrator of this Tracker).