Re: [sv-bc] Is union bit-stream type

Yes, bit-stream casting would make sense for tagged unions, because
the bits of the tag would uniquely specify how to interpret the remaining
bits, and there would be no alignment issue.

Nikhil

Feldman, Yulik wrote:
> Won't it make sense to define the bit-stream casting for tagged unions
> with members of bit-stream types (just asking; not that I see an
> immediate usage for such casting)?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda-stds.org
> [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda-stds.org] On Behalf Of Rich, Dave
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 5:55 PM
> To: Sarani Roy; sv-bc@server.eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Is union bit-stream type
> 
> A packed union is a bit-stream type.
> 
> An unpacked union is not because the alignment of bits between the
> different members of the union is not specified. Therefore you don't
> know the actual number of visible bits it takes to represent the type.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda-stds.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda-
>> stds.org] On Behalf Of Sarani Roy
>> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 1:41 AM
>> To: sv-bc@server.eda-stds.org
>> Subject: [sv-bc] Is union bit-stream type
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a query :
>>  - why Union has not been included in the bit-stream type (Casting) ?
>>
>> thanks
>> Sarani
>>
>