RE: [sv-ac] feedback on 1730 - prop and seq expression

Hi Lisa,
My feeling is that the users will not like typing extra parenthesis,
unless it is syntactically required. Optionally, one can always use
parenthesis for the whole sequence expression argument. However, others
may feel differently.
Surrendra 

-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Piper [mailto:piper@cadence.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 8:57 AM
To: Surrendra Dudani; sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] feedback on 1730 - prop and seq expression

Hi Surrendra,

I did not mean parenthesis around the sequence match item - I meant
around the whole seq expression.

lisa

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
Surrendra Dudani
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 8:41 AM
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] feedback on 1730 - prop and seq expression

Hi Lisa,
The sequence match items already require parenthesis, so additional
parenthesis is not necessary.
Surrendra
>Hi Ed,

>Editorial:  In addition to appendix A, these changes need to be made in
Property Syntax >17-14 and Sequence Syntax 17-4 (note that the draft
still has errors - reference the >>feedback from John on Mantis 928).
>Is it the intent that the user should able to provide a sequence match
item?  Can we require >parenthesis around the whole thing to make it
more readable, especially if a sequence match >item is attached. The
comma before the sequence match item may be difficult to distinguish
from an argument separator when positional binding is used.

>Lisa

 


****************************************
Surrendra A. Dudani
Synopsys, Inc.
377 Simarano Drive, Suite 300
Marlboro, MA 01752

Tel:   508-263-8072
Fax:   508-263-8123
email: Surrendra.Dudani@synopsys.com
**************************************** 

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.