I also vote for changing all 'ieee.sompackage.all' use clauses to 'work.somepackage.all' in the IEEE library. Kind regards, Hendrik. P.S.: Is there a code repository that is used to manage enhancements and bugfixes to the STD and IEEE libraries? Who/where can I send change requests too? On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:57 AM, David Koontz <diogratia@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 20 Sep 2013, at 8:59 AM, "Jones, Andy D" <andy.d.jones@lmco.com> wrote: > > This is what ‘work’ was created for in the first place! The units > themselves should contain no dependency on what their own library is called. > > > I'd only take slight issue with this. The required implementation provided > mechanism specified in 13.2 > Design libraries, para 8 isn't constrained to allow users developing > replacements for packages found in library IEEE to be able to redirect > library logical names in the implementation. > > Further it would require that any such referenced packages (in this case > std_logic_1164) be analyzed into what ever working library is used for say > developing future elaborations to std_logic_textio. > > The issue again is not allowing the enclosure of developing standard > packages as a domain solely controlled by tool vendors, IEEE being an > OpenStand member ( http://open-stand.org/principles/ ). > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is > believed to be clean. > -- Hendrik Eeckhaut, PhD http://www.sigasi.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Fri Sep 20 00:18:42 2013
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 20 2013 - 00:19:22 PDT