Re: [sv-bc] Keywords

>>> From previous e-mails it looks to me like "config" is a top-level block 
>>>(don't have an LRM handy), in which case there is no reason to recognise 
>>>"config" as a keyword in a module.

Nor is there any reason to recognize "module" as a keyword in a module.
But for the sake of uniformity, it is sacrificed.

>>Of course that would make it impossible for a future version
>>of verilog to allow a configuration to be nested within a
>>module.

Future standards will probably arrogate new keywords yet again.
This never seems to trouble determined committees.

When they do, perhaps one lesson to learn from the "config" experience
should be to give words a decent english spelling, e.g., "configure" or
"configuration", in the manner of a Hamming code which considers
their frequency of use relative to the average source code token.

Greg Jaxon

P.S. Someday users may revolt and post the 95 "unreserved identifiers"
      on the cathedral door.  It would be an interesting list, perhaps
      we should accumulate suggestions. Some standards lawyer should
      figure out where printing them would make any difference whatsoever.