Subject: RE: [sv-bc] LRM Issues Review
From: David W. Smith (david.smith@synopsys.com)
Date: Thu Apr 10 2003 - 16:21:26 PDT
Greetins,
Unfortunately your response for LRM-15 does not work.
The BNF in A.2.1 states that the lifetime comes before the data_type. This
means that
static int
is legal (as is automatic int).
In addition, all class examples using static use static before the type (as
the BNF states). So, it looks like we keep it the way it is. The real
question that was being asked was whether we wanted to also allow int static
(not only one or the other).
Regards
David
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of Srouji,
Johny
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 11:14 AM
To: David W. Smith
Cc: sv-bc@eda.org
Subject: [sv-bc] LRM Issues Review
Hi David,
We had a meeting today to discuss SV-BC LRM Open Issues. The attendants
were: Brad Pierce, Karen Pieper, Dan Jacobi, Dave Rich, Matt Maidment and
Johny Srouji.
The attached HTML file includes our resolution for the open issues. It also
has the comments on the LRM sections (some of which are new, for example
from Matt).
Regards,
--- Johny.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Apr 10 2003 - 16:19:04 PDT