[sv-ac] 1549 questions

Hi Folks:

I am working on editing the Annex F changes for 1549.

I am leaning towards replacing $var with $item.  My rationale is that we say
that this function allows operations that are allowed on a declared item of the
same type.  Manisha suggested using something with "implicit" in it.  I thought
that would make the name too long.  But the idea of implicit is intuitive to me
in the sense of an implicit declaration of the item.

I have come across some cases that I'm not sure we have thought through
carefully yet.  I don't think there is anything broken, but we may need to think
about some more explanations and definitions.  Given the remaining time, we may
want to be conservative about adding capabilities.

1. Can event, sequence, or property be used as casting types in user written code?
   Under what circumstances?

2. What are the type matching, compatibility, etc. rules for these new types?

3. Do we intend to allow a compound sequence expression actual argument to be
   passed to a formal argument, untyped or typed "sequence" or "event", that stands 
   in the place of an event_expression in a clocking event?  E.g.

   
      sequence foo (event e);
         @(e) a ##1 b;
      endsequence

      foo (.e(@(c) d[*2]));

      sequence bar(sequence s);
         a ##1 b[*2] ##1 s.ended;
      endsequence

      bar(c ##1 d);


J.H.

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