>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Angel Ezquerra <ang...@gm...> wrote:
> I think the comparison to range is not totally accurate. The docstring
> of the range function is as follows:
>
> range([start,] stop[, step]) -> list of integers
>
> That is, there is no "max" parameter, but a "stop" parameter.
> I'm not saying the current behavior should be changed, just that
> perhaps the parameter name is a bit misleading.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Angel
Ok, /range/ might not have been the best example. More
information on intbv can be found in the manual.
http://www.myhdl.org/doc/current/manual/intro.html#bit-oriented-operations
http://www.myhdl.org/doc/current/manual/reference.html#myhdl.intbv
Regards,
Chris
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Christopher Felton
> <chr...@gm...> wrote:
>> You would simply use MAXV = 2**NBITS. This is common in
>> Python (there is a term for it). Example if you use "range(3)"
>> the list you get is 0,1,2. It doesn't include the 3 only up to.
>> The intbv works the same, max=N, the max value will be
>> N-1. Even though a 3bit value was created "len(x) == 3" the max
>> value was specified and is checked during simulation.
>>
>> Hope that helps,
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:53 PM, garyr <ga...@fi...> wrote:
>>>
>>> It appears to me that the max limit on an intbv value should be > (greater
>>> than) rather than >= (greater than or equal). In the following code, isn't
>>> 3
>>> a valid value for a 3-bit signal?
>>>
<snip>
|
