In reply to lanfranco.salinari:
One minor change, you could call the function from the sequence matched items after the go; thus:
ap_allrose: assert property(@(posedge clk)
(go, setgo(1'b0, 0, 1)) |-> q_all_rose) setgo(1'b1, 0, 0);
On “Having the possibility of looping in sequence and property definitions”, don’t expect any changes on that issue in 1800’2018 because it was never proposed. In addition, this is not a typical application, and incorporating such a thing is fairly complex.
If you do have a proposal, I would like to see it and could propose it to the committee (of which I am a member of) for 1800’2023. The proposals for 2018 are already set, and the changes are very minor.
Ben