[ibis-macro] Re: Your presentation at Asia Summit
- From: "Dodd, Ian" <ian_dodd@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <arpad.muranyi@xxxxxxxxx>, <ibis@xxxxxxx>, <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:49:55 -0800
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@xxxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ibis@xxxxxxx <ibis@xxxxxxx>; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 2:52 PM
To: Muranyi, Arpad; ibis@xxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
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: //www.freelists.org/list/ibis-macro
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-macro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts: