Hi, I vote 'no'. I feel 1757 needs to align to this proposal in some places. Also, I do not feel very comfortable with the usage of term "disable condition' for the expression used in disable iff, accept_on and reject_on. Semantically they produce different results so the expression should also be called something different. I would prefer if disable condition is used for disable iff and accept and reject conditions use a different terminology. The last word in the following sentence does not look correct. However, if a nested module, interface, or program declaration itself has a default disable declaration, then that default disable applies within the nested declaration and overrides any default disable from without. Thanks. Manisha -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Nov 5 11:58:50 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 05 2007 - 11:59:01 PST