From: Jared C. <jar...@gm...> - 2013-07-24 21:54:05
|
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:57 PM, <by...@nc...> wrote: > I added struct and union scope types to the FST writer/reader. As far as I can tell, you don't really need arrays as the variable name conveys enough information. If I'm wrong, this is an easy add. > I think that arrays don't need to be a new scope as long as gtkwave will recognize the array from the name and make it collapsible in the list of signals (which currently is not a hierarchical display, correct?). With dozens of large-ish arrays, I feel like a flat list of all the individual elements in the signal list would quickly become a huge hassle to use. (is this the distinction between a "scope" and a "tree type" in FSDB? A "scope" is a new thing in the SST, and a "tree type" is a hierarchy level in the signal list?) Without a collapsible hierarchy in the signal list, I would probably put arrays into their own scope, in which case a designation for array scopes would be nice. Jared |