RE: [sv-ac] 1466- shortcuts proposal

Hi all,

I think that the issue is not only convergence with PSL and the ease of
typing. The code becomes more readable. Compare:

a[*1:$] ##1 (b ##1 e) [*0:1] ##1 d ##[0:$] c

and

a[+] ##1 (b ##1 e)[?] ##1 d ##[*] c

It would be even better if we could omit brackets

a+ ##1 (b ##1 e)? ##1 d ##* c

Is syntax conflict possible in such cases? We may have discussed it
earlier, but I don't exactly remember.

Regards,
Dmitry

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
Behalf Of Lisa Piper
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:55 PM
To: Yaniv.Fais@freescale.com; Bassam Tabbara
Cc: sv-ac@server.eda.org
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] 1466- shortcuts proposal

Thanks for the feedback.  I agree with your statement "I would also not
teach beginners those as usually they complain that the syntax is
complex and confusing enough; however the enhancement is pretty simple
and advanced 
users may like it or if someone is used to it from PSL then why not." 

The more commonality there is between PSL and SVA, the easier it will be
for users to understand both. I see them used a lot in PSL. Of course,
adding the "?" causes another divergence since PSL does not support
this.

Lisa

-----Original Message-----
From: Fais Yaniv [mailto:yaniv.fais@freescale.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 6:21 AM
To: Bassam Tabbara
Cc: Lisa Piper; sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ac] 1466- shortcuts proposal

Hi all,

I have re-reviewed 1466 and didn't find any issues. (except the coloring

to red of the tokens in the syntax but I guess you can't make these 
purple and red in the same time and that is clear to the editor anyway).

As for Bassams's comments I also don't find these very useful and I can 
type two more characters to make things clearer , I would also not teach

beginners those as usually they complain that the syntax is complex and 
confusing enough; however the enhancement is pretty simple and advanced 
users may like it or if someone is used to it from PSL then why not.

Thanks,
Yaniv




Bassam Tabbara wrote:
> Thx Lisa,
> In case I did not before, I'd like to voice my reservations about the 
> intent of the syntax sugaring here. "?" which a different meaning in 
> Verilog (yes yes different context, still) made my dislike act up :). 
> What bugs me more is the [*], if a user say made a mistake and dropped

> a digit from [*2] say, they get a nasty [*0:$] eating up their time.
> Anyway, food for thought, for me the ROI is not there, I'd rather 
> type/see the $'s (pun intended :)!).
> Thx.
> -Bassam.
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] *On Behalf Of

> *Lisa Piper
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 13, 2007 2:21 PM
> *To:* sv-ac@eda.org
> *Subject:* [sv-ac] 1466- shortcuts proposal
>
> Hi all,
>
> The attached proposal was updated to include a request from Dmitry for

> a shortcut of "?" for 0 to 1. I have uploaded this to mantis.
>
> Lisa
>
>
> -- 
> 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.

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