Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: unsigned -- why a V2K keyword?
From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Date: Tue Oct 08 2002 - 13:45:34 PDT
I don't know whether you were serious or not. I suspect not from the smiley at
the end.
But anyway, it has already been pointed out that on reconsideration,
IEEE 1364 may decide to delete it from the keyword list.
Shalom
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Karen Pieper wrote:
> Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 09:16:58 -0700
> From: Karen Pieper <Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com>
> To: sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: Fwd: RE: unsigned -- why a V2K keyword?
>
> Since unsigned is a reserved word for Verilog 2001 because it is the
> opposite of signed, there is a
> good argument for making static reserved as well......
>
> :-)
>
> K
>
>
> >X-Authentication-Warning: max.boyd.com: majordomo set sender to
> >owner-etf@boyd.com using -f
> >X-Authentication-Warning: magellan.magic.com: smap set sender to
> ><jam@mist.magic.com> using -f
> >Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
> >From: "James A. Markevitch" <jam@magic.com>
> >To: Brad.Pierce@synopsys.COM
> >Subject: RE: unsigned -- why a V2K keyword?
> >Cc: etf@boyd.com
> >Sender: owner-etf@boyd.com
> >
> >Precedence: bulk
> >
> >This question was asked at some point during the 2001 process and I recall
> >the same thing as Steven: it was because "signed" was a keyword.
> >
> >"unsigned" is more special than "enum", etc. because it is the antonym
> >of "signed". One can still argue whether is should be reserved or not,
> >but it's official for the 2001 standard.
> >
> >Note the uglier (in my opinion) concept that the configuration spec words
> >are reserved in the syntax, even though they don't occur in the Verilog
> >language itself, just the config files. This was also discussed during
> >the 2001 process.
> >
> >Hopefully, vendors will make provisions to allow these various keywords
> >to be used, but issue warnings when they appear in Verilog code.
> >
> >James Markevitch
> >
> >
> > > If so, then 'unsigned' would be receiving uniquely special treatment. Why
> > > not 'enum', 'typedef', etc.?
> > >
> > > Also, according to 2.7.3, keywords "are predefined nonescaped identifiers
> > > that are used to define the language constructs", but this is not true of
> > > 'unsigned'.
> > >
> > > -- Brad
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-etf@boyd.com [mailto:owner-etf@boyd.com]On Behalf Of Steven
> > > Sharp
> > > Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 12:22 PM
> > > To: Brad.Pierce@synopsys.COM; etf@boyd.com;
> > > Gordon.Vreugdenhil@synopsys.COM
> > > Subject: Re: unsigned -- why a V2K keyword?
> > >
> > >
> > > Precedence: bulk
> > >
> > > There may have been a desire to reserve unsigned in case it was needed in
> > > the future.
> > >
> > > Steven Sharp
> > > sharp@cadence.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Oct 08 2002 - 13:50:11 PDT