Subject: Re: [sv-bc] propsal for SV-BC Issue 23: Footnote for (old) SV-BC73
From: Greg Jaxon (Greg.Jaxon@synopsys.com)
Date: Mon Jul 21 2003 - 11:02:35 PDT
Dan,
Apostrophe also appears in the "primary" and "constant_primary" rules
of section 3.14 (p22). Since these rules cannot be recognized by a lexical
analysis, I feel it is inappropriate to prohibit whitespace between
their tokens - in fact whitespace may be required by escaped identifiers
for the casting_type. Footnote 12 should not apply to ALL uses of
apostrophe - and if consistency counts for anything, it shouldn't then
apply to ANY. But, being committee work, consistency may not be the only
design goal.
Greg Jaxon
Jacobi, Dan wrote:
> Issue 23
>
> Issue : SV-BC Issue 23: Footnote for (old) SV-BC73
>
> Motivation : clarify that the following statements are illegal
> MyStruct = 1;
> s1 = {default: 0};
>
> Proposal :
>
> 1. Under A.8.4
> REPLACE
> constant_primary ::=
>
> | 0 | 1 | z | Z | x | X
>
> WITH (adding the upper case number 12)
> constant_primary ::=
>
> | 0 | 1 | z | Z | x | X 12 <red bold 0 1 z Z x X , upper case 12>
>
> 2. Under A.8.4
> REPLACE
> primary ::=
>
> | 0 | 1 | z | Z | x | X
>
> WITH (adding the upper case number 12)
> primary ::=
>
> | 0 | 1 | z | Z | x | X 12 <red bold 0 1 z Z x X , upper case 12>
>
> 3. Under Annex A last section titled Notes
> ADD
> 12) The apostrophe () in constant_primary or primary shall not be preceded or followed by white_space.
>
> * note that the foot note number 12 may be replaced by the editor, to fit the foot note numbering mechanism used by the editor.
>
> Dan Jacobi
> Intel Corporation
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jul 21 2003 - 11:05:25 PDT