Re: [sv-bc] Issues on Queue Operators

Hi ,
Thanks for the links given regarding queue operator issue.
But I haven't found  any answer to my third query there.

Thanks,
Sharmistha

Brad Pierce wrote:

>There are many open Mantis items related to assignment patterns, and
>their ownership is currently divided between SV-BC and SV-EC.  The
>queue-related issues are owned by SV-EC.
>
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=412
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=521
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=520
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=518
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=801
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1280
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1301
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=943
>    http://eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1353
>
> -- Brad
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
>Sharmistha Rakshit
>Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 3:24 AM
>To: sv-bc@eda.org
>Subject: [sv-bc] Issues on Queue Operators
>
>Hi,
>I have certain queries regarding queue operator ( IEEE standard 
>1800-2005 LRM , section 5.14 ) .
>1. Here it has been stated
>    "The empty array literal {} is used to denote an empty queue."
>my query :: Should this empty  array literal syntax not be treated as an
>
>assignment pattern and
>          be preceded by an apostrophe( ' ) ?
>2.
>Further , for the example given in section 5.14.1 to explain Queue 
>Operators ( which are not applicable to normal arrays )
>    q ={q,6} ;
>    q = {e,q};
>    q = { q[0:pos-1], e, q[pos,$] };
>    q = { q[0:pos], e, q[pos+1,$] };
>
>Now, we can't have a unsized constant as a member of concat expression .
>should the RHS be treated as concatenation or  assignment pattern  ?
>
>3.Is the following case valid ?
>
>module T; 
>     int b[4:0];
>    int c;
>    int a[4:0] = '{b[3:0],c} ;
>endmodule
>   
>
>Thanks,
>Sharmistha
>   
>
>
>  
>