RE: [sv-bc] [Fwd: Issues with IEEE 1364-2005]

>It sounds like '&&&' is not appropriate to use as a general-purpose
short-circuit
>logical AND.

Because &&& allows the

     expression 'matches' pattern &&& ...

syntax, it can do *more* than a general-purpose short-circuit logical
AND.  How does its greater generality make it inappropriate for a more
restrictive purpose?

Regardless of the original reasons for introducing

    if (expression &&& expression)

it behaves exactly like C users have come to expect from

    if (expression && expression)

.

-- Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Sharp [mailto:sharp@cadence.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 2:43 PM
To: Brad.Pierce@synopsys.COM; nikhil@bluespec.com
Cc: wadams@freescale.com; sv-bc@eda-stds.org;
michael.burns@freescale.com
Subject: Re: [sv-bc] [Fwd: Issues with IEEE 1364-2005]


>From: "Rishiyur Nikhil" <nikhil@bluespec.com>

>'&&&' is not merely a conjunction operator, and its reason for 
>existence is not to introduce short-circuiting-- it is because it has a

>variable-binding function unique to the pattern-matching facilities of 
>the language.

Thanks for the explanation.  It sounds like '&&&' is not appropriate to
use as a general-purpose short-circuit logical AND.

Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com