RE: [sv-bc] 10.8 Named blocks and statement labels - question

That's a circular answer, I think: they can have only one name because
they can have only one name.

Shalom

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich, Dave [mailto:Dave_Rich@mentor.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 7:27 PM
> To: Michael (Mac) McNamara; Steven Sharp; Bresticker, Shalom;
> sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] 10.8 Named blocks and statement labels -
> question
> 
> Because a statement label is just syntactic sugar for a named
> block, and
> right now, named blocks only have one name.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael (Mac) McNamara [mailto:mcnamara@cadence.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:46 AM
> > To: Rich, Dave; Steven Sharp; shalom.bresticker@intel.com;
> sv-bc@eda.org
> > Subject: RE: [sv-bc] 10.8 Named blocks and statement labels -
> question
> >
> > Just curious: what is so bad about allowing multiple names
> for the
> same
> > block of code?  I do not know of other languages with such a
> > restriction.
> >
> >
> > Michael McNamara
> > mcnamara@cadence.com
> > 408-914-6808 work
> > 408-348-7025 cell
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On
> Behalf Of
> > Rich, Dave
> > Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 4:20 PM
> > To: Steven Sharp; shalom.bresticker@intel.com; sv-bc@eda.org
> > Subject: RE: [sv-bc] 10.8 Named blocks and statement labels -
> question
> >
> > Steve,
> >
> > The reason the rule "It shall be illegal to have both a label
> before a
> > begin or fork and a block name after the begin or fork."
> exists is
> > because there is only one block being created; otherwise, it
> wouldn't
> > have been a problem.
> >
> > I've got someone writing a proposal to put normative text
> that
> supports
> > the example.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Steven Sharp [mailto:sharp@cadence.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 4:53 PM
> > > To: shalom.bresticker@intel.com; sv-bc@eda.org; Rich, Dave
> > > Subject: RE: [sv-bc] 10.8 Named blocks and statement labels
> -
> question
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "Rich, Dave" <Dave_Rich@mentor.com>
> > >
> > > >Well, section 17.2 does say so explicitly and there is an
> example
> in
> > > >10.8 of both a begin/end and fork/join with a matching end
> label.
> > >
> > > Actually, 17.2 says that it creates a named block around
> the
> statement
> > > to which it applies.  This means that the label would not
> name the
> > > begin/end that it was attached to, but would create a new
> named
> block
> > > around the statement (the begin/end) that it was attached
> to.