[sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] static variable initializers

Any opinion I had on or before September 24th, 2004 is not necessarily
the opinion I hold now.

Saying that a mantis issue exists does not imply any or lack of
consensus, It's just a place to look for relevant information.

To require the static keyword at this point would not be backwards
compatible, but I think since this is the cause of so much user
confusion, it is worth doing. Also, most implementations have a way to
make this a suppressible error.

Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 1:07 AM
> To: Rich, Dave; sv-bc@server.eda.org; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ec] static variable initializers
> 
> Dave,
> 
> > It hasn't been voted on because there is no proposal for it yet. And
> you
> > won't know who supports it until then (or unless a straw poll it
> taken).
> 
> [SB] That does not contradict what I wrote, which is that not
> necessarily all members of SV-BC support it. It is important to avoid
> presenting it to SV-EC as though there is a consensus in SV-BC to
return
> the requirement. There may or may not be.
> 
> The issue was discussed in SV-EC on September 29, 2003. The minutes
can
> be found in
> http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC-Minutes-2003-September-29.txt .
> According to the minutes, attending that meeting were such SV-BC
> worthies as Brad Pierce, Dave Rich, and Don Mills, none of whom seems
to
> have voted against the change.
> 
> Shalom
> 
> >
> > My comment about Peter Flake's action item was long before we had a
> > mantis system.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:28 AM
> > > To: Rich, Dave; sv-bc@server.eda.org; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> > > Subject: RE: [sv-ec] static variable initializers
> > >
> > > Note that this request was not voted on the SV-BC, and not all
> members
> > > necessarily support it. It was filed in Mantis because some
support
> > it.
> > >
> > > There is a bugnote in 1556 which points to the SV-EC mails and
> > documents
> > > which deleted it.
> > >
> > > Shalom
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org
> [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
> > > On
> > > > Behalf Of Rich, Dave
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 7:23 AM
> > > > To: Steven Sharp; sv-bc@server.eda.org; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> > > > Subject: RE: [sv-ec] static variable initializers
> > > >
> > > > The request to add back the required use of the static keyword
in
> > > > certain cases is mantis 1556. I believe Peter Flake had an
action
> > item
> > > > to address this issue after SV3.0, but he never got around to it
> > > before
> > > > he retired, so the sentence got dropped. (I hear it was a short
> > lived
> > > > retirement :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001556