Arpad, I agree the situation is frustrating. Prehaps you might like to comment on whether it is OK to pass parameters to macro-models without knowing how they are implemented? Bob, I agree with most of your comments. Ian Ian Dodd Architect, High Speed Products Mentor Graphics SDD Division Office: (720) 494 1197 Cell: (303) 881 0558 Email/Blackberry: Ian_Dodd@Mentor.com ----- Original Message ----- From: ibis-macro-bounce@freelists.org <ibis-macro-bounce@freelists.org> To: ibis@eda.org <ibis@eda.org>; ibis-macro@freelists.org <ibis-macro@freelists.org> Sent: Fri Nov 10 17:09:24 2006 Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit Ian, I think your observation in the last paragraph of your message is correct, but this is exactly the problem. Whether we make this practice legal in IBIS or not is not the issue. The issue is that these proprietary solutions only work with their corresponding proprietary tools. IBIS was started and motivated exactly to eliminate that situation. These requests you and Lance are talking about is going in the exact opposite direction of the original goal IBIS was invented for. We might as well get rid of IBIS and all other efforts to have any industry standard modeling languages (*-AMS) then... Arpad ===================================================================== -----Original Message----- From: Dodd, Ian [mailto:ian_dodd@mentor.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 2:52 PM To: Muranyi, Arpad; ibis@eda.org; ibis-macro@freelists.org Subject: RE: [ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit Arpad, I want to support the customer to be provided with the best solutions. I have said many times, that I believe AMS is the best technical solution for full circuit simulation of the newer technologies. Unfortunately, there are two barriers to AMS adoption: the first is getting the majority of the EDA vendors to make their best technology available in their SI tools, the second is the training of model creators to use a new languages. Progress is being made on both these fronts, but it is not as fast as I would like to see. Switching from the AMS issue to SPICE: I think we have all agreed that for us to try to create a standard for SPICE is not a fruitful activity. I do believe that SI tools should be able to pass parameters to SPICE syntax sub-circuits that represent the behavior of IBIS components. The SI tools that implement this feature will have to know the exact syntax (and parameter data types) to be used for each simulator that is supported. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that at least two SI tool vendors already have proprietary enhancements to allow parameters to be passed to SPICE sub-circuits. Ian --------------------------------------------------------------------- IBIS Macro website : http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/macromodel_wip/ IBIS Macro reflector: http://www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro To unsubscribe send an email: To: ibis-macro-request@freelists.org Subject: unsubscribe -------------------------------------------------------------------- |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: | | help | subscribe ibis <optional e-mail address, if different> | subscribe ibis-users <optional e-mail address, if different> | unsubscribe ibis <optional e-mail address, if different> | unsubscribe ibis-users <optional e-mail address, if different> | |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. | |IBIS reflector archives exist under: | | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail since 1993Received on Fri Nov 10 21:50:00 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 10 2006 - 21:50:19 PST