RE: [vhdl-200x-ft] Generic packages and Generic Subprograms

Tristan,

The proposal is based on the Ada style of generics. However, given that
VHDL includes the generic clause after the introductory keyword and
identifier for other constructs (entities, components and blocks), it would
seem more consistent to do likewise for packages and subprograms.

Cheers,

PA

--
Dr. Peter J. Ashenden                        peter@ashenden.com.au
Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd.                   www.ashenden.com.au
PO Box 640                                   Ph:  +61 8 8339 7532
Stirling, SA 5152                            Fax: +61 8 8339 2616
Australia                                    Mobile: +61 414 70 9106
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org] On Behalf Of tgingold@free.fr
> Sent: Friday, 24 December 2004 20:14
> To: Jim Lewis
> Cc: vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org
> Subject: Re: [vhdl-200x-ft] Generic packages and Generic Subprograms
> 
> 
> Quoting Jim Lewis <jim@SynthWorks.com>:
> 
> > Peter,
> > With the generic clause following the generic package and
> > the generic clause preceding the generic 
> procedure/function, seems to 
> > lead to some interesting syntax errors.
> [...]
> > At one point in time I think there was a goal to keep
> > a hamming distance between correct functionality.
> > Should we consider moving the generic clause for the
> > package before the package like the subprogram or
> > alternately should we consider moving the generic
> > clause to after the subprogram declaration.
> Ada already handles generic packages and generic subprogram.
> 
> I think we should closely follow the Ada generic, since it is 
> already well defined and working.
> 
> FYI, in Ada, the generic formal part is before the 
> function/procedure/package reserved word.
> 
> Tristan.
>