Subject: Additional Comments on TBV Proposals
From: Stephen Bailey (SBailey@model.com)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 13:13:56 PDT
Bhasker, et al,
I was thinking that it would probably be better to define LISTs and FIFOs as
predefined protected types. Instead of providing the predefined attributes,
there would be protected type subprograms that would define the same
functionality. (The VHDL source for these protected types would be similar
to existing source for NOW and TextIO subprograms as many of them cannot be
implemented in VHDL. That is OK as long as we semantically define the
functionality in the LRM.)
As I see it, the benefit of defining them as protected types is that it
would probably make both data structures more easily forward compatible with
any subsequent additions of object-oriented capabilities in VHDL. I would
expect OO capabilities to build on the existing protected type encapsulation
and referencing syntax.
I also think that protected types could also be applied to associative and
sparse arrays.
If a protected type approach is taken, I recommend defining them in the
context of package STANDARD to avoid the need for adding yet another use
clause in the VHDL source.
---- Stephen A. Bailey TME, Model Technology 1811 Pike Road, Building #2, Suite F Longmont, CO 80501 sbailey@model.com 303-775-1655 (mobile) 720-494-1202 (office) 720-494-0457 (fax) www.model.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jul 07 2003 - 13:14:41 PDT