Re: [sv-bc] Unclear text in associative array

But "bit [2:0]", unlike "struct packed { bit a; bit; b }", is a
built-in type, even though it's anonymous. I don't agree that it's
declaring a type.

Another question: Would specializing a parameterized class be declaring a type?

-- Brad

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Arturo Salz <Arturo.Salz@synopsys.com> wrote:
> It means that index_type may only be * or a type name (either a built-in
> type or a previously typedef’d name), and cannot be an anonymous type. For
> example, the following declarations would be illegal:
>
>
>
> integer array1[ bit [2:0] ];
>
> int array2[ struct packed { bit a; bit; b } ];
>
>
>
> The way to declare such a type is:
>
>
>
>                 typedef bit [2:0] IndexT1;
>
>                 typedef [ struct packed { bit a; bit; b } IndexT2;
>
>
>
> integer array1[ IndexT1 ];
>
> int array2[ Index2 ];
>
>
>
>     Arturo
>
>
>
> From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of Surya
> Pratik Saha
> Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 9:22 AM
> To: sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: [sv-bc] Unclear text in associative array
>
>
>
> Hi,
> In section 7.8 of SV 2009 LRM, it is mentioned:
>
> It shall be illegal for index_type to declare a type.
>
> What is the meaning of this sentence? It will be better if an example is
> provided.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> Surya
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.