Hi Jim, On 29/10/2014 18:51, Jim Lewis wrote: > Ray, > Oops. I was not clear. I was referring to "very few > engineers/companies asked for VHDL2008 and hence the uptake was rather > slow". I think my statement was a bit too simplistic and obviously there are more factors playing in the slow uptake of VHDL2008. > > I agree, 64 bit integers is not a bug. Asking for them is not > non-compliant with the LRM, however larger than 32 bit would > potentially be non-portable. OTOH, I guess the non-portability (in general) is not really an issue as users can compile modules for different standards. I have seen scripts with both -87 and -2008 used on the same project. Regards, Hans. > > Jim >> And the answer from the vendor when asked to incorporate features not >> in the LRM is that such changes don't comply with the spec, so it >> isn't a bug, nor is it likely to be implements . BTDT. >> >> On 10/29/2014 12:42 PM, Jim Lewis wrote: >>> If that is truely the case, then we have a perception issue. >>> Engineers simply are not in the practice of having to ask a vendor >>> to implement new features of a standard for which the vendor makes a >>> product. From an engineers perspective, having to do that is silly. >>> >>> So our job is to educate people that if they want the new language >>> features, they have to make requests and file bug reports against >>> the tools >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jim >>> >> >> > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Oct 30 02:17:59 2014
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 30 2014 - 02:18:26 PDT