You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
#477 has a workaround by adding an overload to place ModuleInst objects without allowing overlapping placement. This should probably be the default behavior. However, the BlockPlacer2 and other code has been working in the opposite sense for some time now. There should be a transition to disallow or make the obvious place() method disallow this by default. One other consideration is that ModuleInst.getAllValidPlacements() uses ModuleInst.place() to identify which locations are valid for placing the module. Usually it does this in a vacuum, but it can also destructively change the Design's set of used SiteInst.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
#477 has a workaround by adding an overload to place ModuleInst objects without allowing overlapping placement. This should probably be the default behavior. However, the
BlockPlacer2
and other code has been working in the opposite sense for some time now. There should be a transition to disallow or make the obviousplace()
method disallow this by default. One other consideration is thatModuleInst.getAllValidPlacements()
usesModuleInst.place()
to identify which locations are valid for placing the module. Usually it does this in a vacuum, but it can also destructively change theDesign
's set of usedSiteInst
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: