RE: [sv-bc] Proposal to make it easier to use packages with port declarations

Brad,

The syntax you suggest works fine with me.  It simple, self-documenting, and
lets the imports be visible for use in parameter declarations and the port
list.

Stu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Sutherland
stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
+1-503-692-0898
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Brad Pierce
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 2:54 PM
> To: sv-bc@server.eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-bc] Proposal to make it easier to use 
> packages with port declarations
> 
> Stu,
> 
>  
> 
> I agree with you that we should strive to make any new syntax 
> look like Verilog.
> 
>  
> 
> How would you feel about prepending
> 
>  
> 
>      [ package_import_list ]  
> 
>  
> 
> to every occurrence of
> 
>  
> 
>      [ parameter_port_list ]
> 
>  
> 
> where
> 
>  
> 
>     package_import_list ::= 
> 
>         import ( [ package_import_item { , package_import_item } ] )
> 
>  
> 
> ? For example,
> 
>  
> 
>     extern module automatic M 
>           import(shared_decls::*, shared_decls2::something)
>           #(...)
>           (...);
> 
>  
> 
> -- Brad
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On 
> Behalf Of Stuart Sutherland
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:19 PM
> To: sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Proposal to make it easier to use 
> packages with port declarations
> 
>  
> 
> Brad,
> 
>  
> 
> I do not have a strong preference for either of the proposed 
> syntax styles,
> 
> though I do have a slight preference to using the already existing V2K
> 
> parameter list just because it looks more like Verilog.  The 
> important thing
> 
> to me is the ability to use package definitions in port 
> declarations without
> 
> having to redundantly name the package for each port.  I will 
> leave the
> 
> fine-grain details on where semicolons and such are needed to parser
> 
> experts.
> 
>  
> 
> Stu
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Stuart Sutherland
> 
> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> 
> +1-503-692-0898
> 
>   
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> 
> > From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org 
> 
> > [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Brad Pierce
> 
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 2:44 PM
> 
> > To: sv-bc@server.eda.org
> 
> > Subject: Re: [sv-bc] Proposal to make it easier to use 
> 
> > packages with port declarations
> 
> > 
> 
> > Stu,
> 
> > 
> 
> > Following up on http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/4402.html , are 
> 
> > you still in
> 
> > favor of the syntax you proposed in Mantis 329?  (Personally, I'm
> 
> > tending to favor the syntax of Gord in
> 
> > http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/4408.html .)
> 
> > 
> 
> > If so, the BNF in the proposal would need to be modified to 
> take into
> 
> > account that currently "package_import_declaration" includes its
> 
> > terminating semicolon.  The BNF in the proposal would only 
> 
> > accept syntax
> 
> > like
> 
> > 
> 
> >    module #(import shared_decls::*; parameter SIZE = 2048)   
> 
> > 
> 
> > That's OK by me for the reasons in 
> 
> > 
> 
> >    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=922
> 
> > 
> 
> > but your examples indicate that such semicolon syntax wasn't your
> 
> > intent.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Less importantly, the proposal would need to be updated to 
> reflect the
> 
> > clause renumberings, a recent fix to the 
> 
> > "parameter_port_list" BNF, and
> 
> > perhaps other things.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Also, there might need to be some restriction on syntax such as
> 
> > 
> 
> >    module #(import shared_decls::*, SIZE = 2048)
> 
> > 
> 
> > perhaps requiring that the parameter keyword can only be 
> 
> > omitted at the
> 
> > start of a parameter port list
> 
> > 
> 
> >    module #(size = 2048, import shared_decls::*)
> 
> > 
> 
> > But I haven't thought about that enough to offer an opinion.
> 
> > 
> 
> > -- Brad
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
>  
> 
>