RE: [sv-ac] AC 196 - optional type spec?

Optional data types should not be dropped with the new BNF. Please explain why you require this.
Hillel

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org]On Behalf Of Eduard Cerny
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 6:07 PM
To: Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com; sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] AC 196 - optional type spec?

But the question then remains what form can be used to allow optional type
specification in sequences and properties. Should type spec be dropped until
it is possible to enlarge the type system by "sequence" and "property"?

ed
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Brad Pierce
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 6:45 PM
> To: sv-ac@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] AC 196 - optional type spec?
>
> The old portlist-style and the V2K prototype-style port
> declarations cannot be mixed in a module declaration. It's
> one or the other.
>
> Similarly, if module parameters are declared with the V2K #()
> style then additional parameters cannot be declared in the
> module. (You can still use the 'parameter' keyword within the
> module, but you'll get localparams, as in $unit.)
>
> -- Brad
>
>
Received on Tue Nov 16 09:49:29 2004