Date: Wed Aug 06 2014 - 01:21:29 PDT
That's right - not good and not desired. But - allowed. And even further - because of the extensible nature of e, with the define-as and define-as-computed macros that allow to "introduce" any new syntax, there can appear new (user-defined) keywords which are not part of the original definition. We certainly wouldn't like such a newly introduced keyword to become disallowed in other contexts. Yuri. From: Uwe Simm Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 10:26 To: Yuri Tsoglin; Silas McDermott; Cristian Amitroaie Cc: ieee1647@eda.org Subject: RE: pre-defined type names are not keywords hi, not sure if I would label these code fragments "good" or "desired". context sensitive parsing isn't making life easier for tool developers and the value of using something like "struct" as field name or type name is at best zero. /uwe From: owner-ieee1647@eda.org [mailto:owner-ieee1647@eda.org] On Behalf Of Yuri Tsoglin Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 12:27 AM To: Silas McDermott; Cristian Amitroaie Cc: ieee1647@eda.org Subject: RE: pre-defined type names are not keywords Or unit unit { unit; }; Or even type type: [ type ]; From: Silas McDermott Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 00:50 To: Yuri Tsoglin; Cristian Amitroaie Cc: ieee1647@eda.org<mailto:ieee1647@eda.org> Subject: Re: pre-defined type names are not keywords Which reminds me of my favorite e code example ever: struct struct { struct; }; Try THAT in a different language! - Silas. [cid:image002.png@01CFB168.91AA5C90] Silas McDermott | AE Director | Systems and Advanced Verification P: 503.970.2916 www.cadence.com<http://www.cadence.com/> From: Yuri Tsoglin <yurit@cadence.com<mailto:yurit@cadence.com>> Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 at 1:53 PM To: Cristian Amitroaie <cristian@amiq.com<mailto:cristian@amiq.com>> Cc: "ieee1647@eda.org<mailto:ieee1647@eda.org>" <ieee1647@eda.org<mailto:ieee1647@eda.org>> Subject: RE: pre-defined type names are not keywords Apparently yes, e_core is mentioned in Annex D. Here it is, I am quoting: D.2.5 Reserved type names One set of types in e is considered essential or core, e.g., int, string, and sys. No reasonable e program would assign the name of any of those types to a user-defined type. Core types are declared under a special package called e_core. Within the name space model, e_core type names are reserved. Unlike other type names, they cannot be used in another package. For more information, see D.3.3. D.3.3 e_core types The set of types declared in the built-in package e_core is privileged. Unlike all other types, the names of the e_core types remain unique, even if they have been added by user extension. When a user tries to define a type using the name of an e_core type, an error is reported. However, these names are not reserved keywords; they can be used as identifiers in any other context (variable names, method names, and so on). The e_core types are: int, uint, byte, bit, bool, string, sys, global, base_struct, any_struct, any_unit, and event_port. BTW, it seems that the above list of e_core types is incomplete. For example, "real" is missing. Also, there are no "reserved keywords" in e in general. Even keywords which are not e_core type names, are such only in the sense that each one of them has a special meaning in a certain context. But no one of them is reserved, and they may also be used in other contexts. For example, the word "struct" can be used to define a struct (and in this sense it is a keyword), but it is also allowed to be a name of a type, field, variable, method, and anything else. Thanks, Yuri. -----Original Message----- From: Cristian Amitroaie [mailto:cristian@amiq.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 23:07 To: Yuri Tsoglin Cc: ieee1647@eda.org<mailto:ieee1647@eda.org> Subject: Re: pre-defined type names are not keywords Hi Yuri, I think it makes sense. The question is weather we want users to be able to redefine "int" for example... BTW, is "e_core" in the standard? Thanks, Cristian On Sunday 03 August 2014 07:29:56 pm Yuri Tsoglin wrote: > Hi, > > I think we should remove type names such as "int", "string", or "sys", from > the keywords table (section 4.1.5.3 in the current LRM). > > These words are just type names, which happen to belong to the "e_core" > package. In this sense, they are not different from any other pre-defined > types, which may belong to other packages (e.g. rf_manager or > any_sequence_driver). > > Does this make sense? > > Thanks, > Yuri. > > > > > [cid:image002.jpg@01CFAF50.EA6C8A20<mailto:image002.jpg@01CFAF50.EA6C8A20>] > > Yuri Tsoglin | e Language team, Specman RnD > > P: 972.3.9004305 M: 972.54.6468177 F: 972.3.9004001 > www.cadence.com<http://www.cadence.com> -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
