> In this case there is no p1 visible at the point of compilation > of function f. Is this legal? Is SV adopting dynamic scoping? :-) The LRM says "The elements of the expression must be visible at the scope of subroutine". In your example, 'p1' would be an unresolved identifier in the scope of the subroutine, so this would be illegal. I think part of the confusion here is what the term "elements of the expression" means. When you have an expression like 'p1', I think the element of the expression is the object that the identifier 'p1' resolves to in that scope. Other people seem to think that the element of the expression is simply the identifier itself. Perhaps this needs to be reworded to make clear what was meant. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org]On Behalf Of Paul > Graham > Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 10:24 AM > To: gordonv@model.com > Cc: ieee1800@eda.org; sv-bc@eda.org > Subject: Re: [sv-bc] Serious issue with default expressions for task and > function arguments > > > > The default_value is an expression. The expression is evaluated in > > the scope of the caller each time the subroutine is called. The > > elements of the expression must be visible at the scope of subroutine > > Here's another example: > > function f(integer x = p1); > return x; > endfunction > > module m1(...); > parameter p1 = 1; > assign q = f(); // q == 1 > endmodule > > module m1(...); > parameter p1 = 2; > assign q = f(); // q == 2 > endmodule > > In this case there is no p1 visible at the point of compilation > of function f. Is this legal? Is SV adopting dynamic scoping? :-) > > PaulReceived on Thu Mar 3 10:40:01 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 03 2005 - 10:40:09 PST