Re: [vhdl-200x-ft] Bit rules

Jim Lewis wrote:

> David,
> What is the decision process for proposing changes
> and adopting them? I noticed that you have
> implemented proposal 4 before we have finished
> discussing it.

Yes, it seemed a logical thing to do.

> My preference would be that we discuss things,
> agree that we should go this direction, vote
> if necessary, record the decision, and implement
> the change.

I like discussion too. It is much easier to remove
code than it is to write it. One way or the other
these routines will be useful.

> I understand testing the proposal. Is that why
> you posted the code, or do you consider the
> decision done?
>
> I like the enthusiasm, but I find the process
> difficult to follow.

This is still up for discussion. In fact, the entire
structure of the fixed point package is still up for
discussion. The problem is that it is very difficult to
see if something is feasible unless you try it.

>> -- From Ryan
>>
>>>> PROPOSAL 4
>>>>
>>>> Define mixed signed/unsigned logic. Add "+", "*", "-", and "/"
>>>> operators
>>>> for all combinations of UFIXED/SFIXED. This is another fairly common
>>>> operation in signal processing hardware that is well-defined. David
>>>> noted
>>>> that bit literals need a type cast anyway, so we shouldn't have the
>>>> same
>>>> problem as mixed arithmetic in numeric_std.
>
>

-- 
NAME:     David W. Bishop           INTERNET: dbishop@vhdl.org