>Does the statement in 6.20.2.1 actually imply that $ can be assigned only >to parameters and then only to ones of integer types? No, it doesn't. It says that 1) An integer parameter can be assigned '$'. (Perhaps there are other sorts of data objects that can be assigned '$', perhaps not, but this statement is silent on that issue.) 2) An integer parameter that has been assigned '$' can only be legally referred to in contexts where '$' would anyway be legal. -- Brad -----Original Message----- From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of John Havlicek Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007 3:10 PM To: shalom.bresticker@intel.com Cc: john.havlicek@freescale.com; sv-ac@eda-stds.org Subject: Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549 Hi Shalom: This is interesting. We have thought for a long time that $ can be passed as actual argument to sequence and property instances. I think tools support this too. Does the statement in 6.20.2.1 actually imply that $ can be assigned only to parameters and then only to ones of integer types? That is not the way I read it. I also do not like the turn of phrase "An actual argument can replace any of the following:" Best regards, J.H. > X-ExtLoop1: 1 > X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.19,281,1183359600"; > d="scan'208";a="284779936" > X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 > Content-class: urn:content-classes:message > Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:57:00 +0300 > X-MS-Has-Attach: > X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: > Thread-Topic: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549 > Thread-Index: AcfgwmImOfiRY4IgSZCSHsE6gjltOABeqaNg > From: "Bresticker, Shalom" <shalom.bresticker@intel.com> > Cc: <sv-ac@eda-stds.org> > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2007 08:57:02.0177 (UTC) > FILETIME=[E89C8510:01C7E23E] > > John, > > I looked at this a little. > > Mantis 1350 discusses ambiguities with respect to the use of $, but > the basic restrictions are stated at the beginning of 6.20.2.1: > > "The value $ can be assigned to parameters of integer types. A > parameter to which $ is assigned shall only be used wherever $ can be > specified as a literal constant." > > Assigning $ to a variable does not fit those criteria. > Nor does passing $ as an argument. > You mentioned passing $ "as actual argument expression to a typed > formal argument." > I do not see that it could be passed even to an untyped formal argument. > > I doubt even that what is written in 16.7 meets those criteria: > > "An actual argument can replace any of the following: > ... > - Upper delay range or repetition range if the actual argument is $" > > Regards, > Shalom > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Havlicek [mailto:john.havlicek@freescale.com]=20 > > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 2:32 PM > > To: Bresticker, Shalom > > Cc: Bustan, Doron; Yaniv.Fais@freescale.com; sv-ac@eda-stds.org > > Subject: Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549 =20 Hi Shalom: > >=20 > > Lisa and I had a discussion yesterday about the example in=20 the > >1549 proposal. > >=20 > > I do not think the LRM as it stands now allows $ to be=20 assigned > >to a variable or passed as actual argument=20 expression to a typed > >formal argument. Do you know otherwise? > >=20 > > The main conceptual issue that I see with allowing $ to be=20 > >assigned to a variable or passed as actual argument=20 expression to > >a typed formal argument is defining what value=20 it has in the > >space of possible values for the associated data type. > >=20 > > It doesn't seem quite right to me to say that if $ is=20 assigned > >to a shortint, for example, then the value is the=20 largest one > >that can be represented in an shortint. On the=20 other hand, maybe > >this is a useful and sensible definition. =20 With definitions of > >this kind, the meaning of $ is dependent=20 on the data type into > >which it is assigned or to which it is=20 bound, but there is > >already precedent for that in the various=20 coercion rules. > >=20 > > I recommended that we avoid this problem altogether for now=20 and > >not allow $ to be assigned to a variable or passed as=20 actual > >argument expression to a typed formal argument. I=20 recommended > >that Lisa change the example to pass $ to a=20 context formal > >argument. > >=20 > > J.H. > >=20 > > > X-Authentication-Warning: server.eda-stds.org: majordom set=20 > > sender to=20 > > > owner-sv-ac@eda.org using -f > > > X-ExtLoop1: 1 > > > X-IronPort-AV: E=3DSophos;i=3D"4.19,269,1183359600";=20 > > > d=3D"scan'208";a=3D"118117813" > > > X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 > > > Content-class: urn:content-classes:message > > > Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:15:58 +0300 X-MS-Has-Attach:=20 > > > X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:=20 > > > Thread-Topic: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549 > > > Thread-Index: = > AcfeiQ52OKcMoqhRQC+dKxDIPbJwOwADZVDwABotlYAAMwPDUA=3D=3D > > > From: "Bresticker, Shalom" <shalom.bresticker@intel.com> > > > Cc: <sv-ac@eda-stds.org> > > > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 06:15:59.0713 (UTC)=20 > > >FILETIME=3D[EA184510:01C7DFCC] > > > X-eda.org-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean > > > X-Spam-Status: No, No > > > X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by=20 > > >server.eda-stds.org id l7G6GDdJ019035 > > > Sender: owner-sv-ac@eda.org > > > X-eda.org-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for > > >more=20 information > > > X-eda.org-MailScanner-From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org =20 The > > >LRM states in other places restrictions on the use of $.=20 The > > >question is whether the example fulfills those conditions. > > >=20 > > > The following quoted wording is a little unclear:=20 =20 > > > > An actual argument can replace any of the following: > > > > - Identifier > > > > - Expression > > > > - Event control expression > > > > - Upper delay range or repetition range if the actual=20 > > argument is $ > > >=20 > > > "can replace" seems a little problematic here. > > > An actual argument cannot really replace an expression. E.g., > > >it=20 cannot replace a+b. It can replace a formal argument > > >which=20 > > is used as=20 > > > an expression, which is a little different. > > >=20 > > > And does this list cover all the possibilities, or is it=20 > > just intended=20 > > > to be examples? > > >=20 > > > And does the last item mean: > > > 1. If the actual argument is $, it can be used only in this=20 > > way? If it=20 > > > is not $, can it be used in this way? > > > 2. It can be used in this way only if it is $? If it is $,=20 > > can it be=20 > > > used in another way? -- 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.Received on Sun Aug 19 23:38:14 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 19 2007 - 23:38:20 PDT