[ibis-macro] Re: input parameters to AMI_Resolve in BIRD155.1
- From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:39:36 +0000
I tend to agree with Ambrish on this one. This is the
way I would summarize:
If the input portion of an InOut is needed by the resolve
function, we need to pass InOut parameters to it. The
catch is that the resolve function should not depend on
the output portion returned by the Init function of this
InOut parameter.
So I would prefer to allow InOut to be passed into the
resolve function as well, but spell out in the specification
clearly and loudly that the resolve function shall not
rely on the output portion returned by Init.
Thanks,
Arpad
=================================================================
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ambrish Varma
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:57 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: input parameters to AMI_Resolve in BIRD155.1
Fangyi,
If the model maker understands that
a) The AMI_Resolve function is called pre-characterization, and
b) The AMI_Init function is called post-characterization and
c) Any change in the input parameters after AMI_Init call will not affect
the dep parameters once they are resolved in AMI_Resolve -
then we should be ok with having the same input parameter string to both the
functions.
We can add the following words (or something similar) to step 9 to make sure
that the flow is clear:
'Any change in any of the AMI parameters out of AMI_Init or AMI_Getwave will
not affect the already resolved parameters from the AMI_Resolve function.'
Thanks,
Ambrish.
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
fangyi_rao@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:fangyi_rao@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:57 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis-macro] input parameters to AMI_Resolve in BIRD155.1
Hi, AMI experts;
In the current AMI_Resolve API BIRD (155.1) we require that only usage In
parameters are included in the input parameters string to the AMI_Resolve
function as independent variables. At the last AMI meeting we had talked about
whether InOut parameters should also be included. I'd like to collect your
feedback on this topic. If you have a preference, please share your reasons.
Below are the reasons I can see for a yes or no answer.
Reason to not include:
- Eliminates the possibility of AMI_Init modifying input parameters
(independent variables) to AMI_Resolve after it's been called.
Reason to include:
- AMI_Resolve and AMI_Init have identical input parameter strings
Thanks,
Fangyi
Other related posts:
