>At the risk of getting into an argument for the sake of it, that brings
>up another question. When SV data types are extended to nets why not
>allow `default_nettype to be legal with any user defined net data type ??
Krishna, the "net types" in `default_nettype are not the data types, but
are the object "kinds". They are independent or orthogonal to the
data types. They are not user defined, and the work being done in this
group doesn't change that.
>Once that happens, a user can create custom data types with the wone like
>attribute and use it along with `default_nettype. While I have nothing
>against wone like nets, I am only wondering why make the language any bigger
Since users cannot create new net types (i.e. "kinds" in the nomenclature
being used in this group), there is no facility for doing this themselves.
>1) if an attribute can capture the essence of a new construct
>2) (and) it's something a select few would be interested in ??
How few you think would be interested in it may depend on what customers
you have been talking to.
Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com
Received on Thu Oct 28 19:22:21 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 28 2004 - 19:22:40 PDT