relational operators

[krithiga81]

Hello All
I am using this statement in VHDL

if ( 0 <= (locklength-nlock) < 1 ) then
.....

and there is a compile error

ncvhdl_p: *E,SEQREL (../PLL_MN100.vhd,518|39): illegal sequence of
relational operators [7.1] [7.2.2].

Is there anything wrong in the above statement?

This works in Verilog.

Thanks
krithiga

 

[Andy]

You cannot chain logical operators in vhdl.

In your exampe, 0 <= (locklength - nlock) returns boolean, which you
are then trying to compare to 1. Or, (locklength - nlock) < 1 returns
boolean, which you are then trying to compare to 0. Either way, it does
not work.

Andy

 

[Paul Uiterlinden]

Hello All
I am using this statement in VHDL

if ( 0 <= (locklength-nlock) < 1 ) then
....

and there is a compile error

ncvhdl_p: *E,SEQREL (../PLL_MN100.vhd,518|39): illegal sequence of
relational operators [7.1] [7.2.2].

Is there anything wrong in the above statement?

Yes, it is not valid VHDL. Use this instead:

IF (0 <= (locklength-nlock)) AND ((locklength-nlock) < 1) THEN

 

[krithiga81]

Hi
Thanks. It does compile but gives

Error! simulated time overflow
File: ../PLL_MN100.vhd, line = 518, pos = 29
Scope: testbench.dut:$PROCESS_028
Time: 0 FS + 0

.../PLL_MN100.vhd:518 if ( 0 <= (locklength-nlock)) AND
((locklength-nlock) < 1 ) then

I have declared locklength and nlock as integer

Thanks
krithiga

Hello All
I am using this statement in VHDL

if ( 0 <= (locklength-nlock) < 1 ) then
....

and there is a compile error

ncvhdl_p: *E,SEQREL (../PLL_MN100.vhd,518|39): illegal sequence of
relational operators [7.1] [7.2.2].

Is there anything wrong in the above statement?

Yes, it is not valid VHDL. Use this instead:

IF (0 <= (locklength-nlock)) AND ((locklength-nlock) < 1) THEN

 

[Paul Uiterlinden]

Hi
Thanks. It does compile but gives

Error! simulated time overflow
File: ../PLL_MN100.vhd, line = 518, pos = 29
Scope: testbench.dut:$PROCESS_028
Time: 0 FS + 0

../PLL_MN100.vhd:518 if ( 0 <= (locklength-nlock)) AND
((locklength-nlock) < 1 ) then

I have declared locklength and nlock as integer

Hmm, that's odd. Could be an error message that does not quite
indicate the correct position of the actual error.

Just guessing: perhaps you've used a variable of type time that should
have been initialized to 0 ns. In that case, use type delay_length in
stead of time. Initialization to 0 ns is then done automatically, as
the left bound of delay_length is 0 ns.

I would suggest to strip down the code to find out where the error
comes from.