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

No, Named blocks currently only have one name. Statement labels are
another way to express a named block. If you want named blocks to have
two names, that's another enhancement.

Nesting block names is not the same as giving one block two names.



Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:31 AM
> To: Rich, Dave; sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: 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.