Subject: Re: Answer from "Arturo Salz"
The wording we voted on last Monday actually has different wording for the
K
At 06:22 PM 1/11/03 +0100, Vassilios.Gerousis@Infineon.Com wrote:
>Brad,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28
: Sat Jan 11 2003 - 14:19:58 PST
From: Karen Pieper (Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com)
Date: Sat Jan 11 2003 - 14:19:26 PST
two types.
The underlying types are the same, but one is for "C" and the other is for
SystemVerilog use.
>
>The issue is that if you look at the LRM, you'll find two identical types
>now: byte and char.
>Both are defined as a signed 2-state, 8-bit integer. Surely we don't need
>two identical types,
>specially when we are trying to minimize the addition of new keywords.
>
> Arturo
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Brad Pierce" <bpierce@synopsys.COM>
>To: "Arturo Salz" <Arturo.Salz@synopsys.COM>; "David W. Smith"
><david.smith@synopsys.COM>;
><sv-ec@eda.org>; <sv-bc@eda.org>; <sv-cc@eda.org>
>Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 10:09 AM
>Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Unicode
>
>
>Arturo,
>
>I don't think 'byte' is *conceptually* redundant. If anything, 'byte' is a
>more basic concept than 'char'. We shouldn't force people to say 'char'
>when they mean 'byte'.
>
>-- Brad