David,
>> It would seem to make more sense if the generic
>> package were named fphdl_pkg rather than fphdl32_pkg.
>>
>> Since we are stepping into the void with generic types,
>> should we also consider using records of unconstrained
>> arrays as the base?
>
>
> 2 basic problems with records:
> 1: You can't have an unconstrained array in a record,
> though the new generics get around that nicely.
Like type generics and generics on packages, unconstrained
arrays in records is proposed in fast track.
> 2: It doesn't look like a "number" any more. Thus it would
> be tougher to deal with on a conceptual basis.
>
> I really think that I've come up with a fairly elegent solution
> to floating and fixed point with the negative index trick. Can
> you think of a better way?
So far we agree on what happens if the range is downto, but
do not agree on what happens when the range is to, hence,
I have a little concern. Records would remove this, however,
in some ways, it does not look as much like a number,
particularly for fixed point.
Regards,
Jim
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jim Lewis Director of Training mailto:Jim@SynthWorks.com SynthWorks Design Inc. http://www.SynthWorks.com 1-503-590-4787 Expert VHDL Training for Hardware Design and Verification ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Received on Sat Nov 6 19:36:13 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Nov 06 2004 - 19:36:14 PST