Re: [vhdl-200x-ft] New code release

Peter Ashenden wrote:
> If we follow the approach of standardizing the package declarations and not
> the bodies, we'll have to describe the semantics of the operations in some
> form, such as English prose. (This is currently the approach used for
> std.textio.) My preference would be to specify the semantics in VHDL (as
> was done in 1164 and 1076.3) since it is a more precise form of
> specification.

Mine would be to express the operation in VHDL as well. However we MUST
keep these packages in the public domain. The reason it took so long
for numeric_std and math_real to get adopted (one vendor adopted math_real
just last month for the first time) was because of all of the problems
with encryption of the IEEE packages.

The idea of a common package is so that users can use the functions in it.
If you can't see the package, what good is it? I would rather see these
packages unpublished than see them black holed again.

All of the standard VHDL packages need to be publicly visible on a web page.
(any seconds to this motion?)

David W. Bishop dbishop@vhdl.org All standard disclaimers apply.
Received on Wed Aug 25 05:29:20 2004