Conversation
|
@gmartina thanks for ýour new PR. I'll review it in the next days. A question ahead: /cc @stefanunrein |
|
@Paebbels Do you mean the ideas that come out of this? |
|
I was referring to the OSVVM training class materials. Like using random testing, measuring FIFO size and comparing against actual size, etc. |
|
@gmartina any idea why NVC fails? |
|
No idea. I think it has nothing to do with my changes.
I am using Random and Coverage only in one test. The other 2 are more like basic smoke tests. |
|
This is just a warning.
This is known and can be fixed with an upcoming version of OSVVM. Then we can set common options to NVC and mute that warning. It's created because we move precompiled sources as artifact from job to job. The second job does a new Git checkout, hence the files in the second job are newer by date, but not by content. This confuses NVC. Actually, this behavior is not according to the standard, but a good hint for local (non distributed) coding. See this error here:
There are multiple instances of that error. All are complaining |
Sorry, I didnt see that. PR updated. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This file is not related to this PR topic. But I was getting an error when doing a regression test with GHDL. I dont understand why this didnt show up in previous PRs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you have an older GHDL and/or NVC?
This was a bug in older revisions in both tools. It should be fixed. Any you need to compile using -frelaxed.
Thanks. I might find time tomorrow for the complete PR. Don't you get emails from GutHub Actions for failed or successful Actions? |
Tests
Related Issues and Pull-Requests