Re: [vhdl-200x] Revised white paper on type genericity

From: Hamish Moffatt <>
Date: Tue Apr 20 2004 - 18:18:32 PDT

Jayaram Bhasker wrote:
> Re 2.1, I dont like the concept of instantiating a generic package as a declarative item.
> At beginning of section 2.1, the generic package instantiation is defined to be semantically
> equivalent to a normal package (and a design unit). This is good.
> In current VHDL, just like
> you cannot have a package declaration as a declarative item, I suggest that we not
> support a generic package instantiation as a declarative item. We should try
> to follow the normal package rules, i.e. inclusion of a package (including a
> generic package instantiation) is achieved by using the use clause.


Peter's proposal seems to allow a generic package instantiation anywhere
a use clause is allowed. All of those places (entity declaration,
package declaration, package body, subprogram etc) allow use clauses and
so now they will allow generic package instantiations as well.

That seems quite consistent to me and therefore quite appropriate.

I like the proposal. I could start using it in my work today...


Hamish Moffatt
R&D Engineer
Data Networks Division
Agilent Technologies
+61 3 9210 5782 (T210 5782) Tel
Received on Tue Apr 20 18:19:00 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 20 2004 - 18:20:14 PDT