Re: [vhdl-200x-ft] generics in packages

I'm not up to much on the generic package stuff but I would think that
the line package numeric_std_nowarn is ....
makes a new copy of the package and as a result new copies of SIGNED and
UNSIGNED which are different from SIGNED and UNSIGNED in the regular package
numeric_std. If this is the case then one would have problems connecting
to modules together because the type would be different.

David Bishop wrote:
> One of the proposals at the bottom of our proposals page is:
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/vhdl-200x/vhdl-200x-ft/proposals/dta_type_genericity.pdf
> Which describes how to add generics to packages.
>
> In NUMERIC_STD there is a constant called "NO_WARNING".
> This constant turned out to be very useful to us while debugging
> the packages. It is also useful to the users, but there is
> no way for them to get at it.
>
> Some vendors have even implemented special options to turn this
> "no_warning" boolean on.
>
> Now, why can't we do the following:
>
> packages numeric_std is
> generic (no_warning : boolean := false);
>
> Then the user could say:
>
> use ieee.numeric_std.all;
> architecture rtl of whatever
> package numeric_std_nowarn is new numeric_std
> generic map (no_warning => true);
> ...
> begin
>
> and warnings would be shut off. (If I read this proposal
> correctly)
>
> This also helps out with the fixed and floating point packages
> to control rounding and overflow.
>
> Shall I or Shall I not? I know I'm sending out lots of e-mails,
> but I will not make a major change to the packages without checking
> first.
>

-- 
-- mailto: johnr@model.com     phone: (503)685-0864
--   http://www.model.com        fax: (503)685-0921
--