>>5. The "inside" version is more verbose.
>>
>>
>It's already there from the constraint functionality. This was just an
>attempt to consolidate the language.
Which would be an argument to eliminate the wildcard compares, since this
constraint functionality already provides the desired functionality. But
if there are reasons other than the (presumably undesirable) functionality
difference for keeping the compares, then they should be fixed.
The origin in the constraint functionality will tend to make people regard
this as a testbench feature, rather than something synthesizable. However,
this may be less of a problem with users who are unaware of the history of
its development.
>At one time there was an insidex version, but that was eliminated. This
>could always be enhanced.
This seems to be a symptom of uncoordinated design. I assume that the
decisions to have "inside" match casez and the wildcard operators match
casex were made without taking the other decision into account. Now
that I am aware of it, I will have to file it as another erratum.
>You've got one more day to file an errata for this next round. ;-)
I believe that my original email already counts as filing an erratum.
Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com
Received on Tue Aug 31 12:58:24 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Aug 31 2004 - 12:58:32 PDT