Subject: Re: [vhdl-200x] An alternative proposal to boolean equivalence
From: Hamish Moffatt (hamish_moffatt@agilent.com)
Date: Tue Dec 23 2003 - 14:27:25 PST
Robert Ingham wrote:
> 4. For the integer-to-boolean conversion case, my preference is for 0 or
> less to map to 'false', and 1 or above to map to 'true'. This has merit for
> unsigned counters etc., but if others know better reasons for other mappings
> then I would concede.
I'm not sure that ANY mapping would be appropriate by default.
Logically, why does 0 mean false and > 0 mean true? Even if you are
testing the value of a counter, why is zero false?
This mapping is just like C, and I think C uses it to make up for its
lack of booleans. There's no reason why we should have that same mapping
in VHDL because we have proper booleans.
Regards
Hamish
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Dec 23 2003 - 14:28:45 PST