Re: [sv-bc] $unit::m or $root.m in module instance?

Michael (Mac) McNamara wrote:

> Moreover, one should really adopt a naming convention for local modules
> in order to make understanding the code easier, and also to greatly
> reduce the risk of overlap:
> 
> module top;
>       module local_to_top_nest;
>       endmodule
> 
> 	// local nest
>       Local_to_top_nest n1(a,b);
> 
> 	// global nest;
> 	nest n2(b,c);
> 
> endmodule

One philosophy of 4th generation compilers is that
the compiler - not the end user - implements these
conventions.  In fact, within the language, they are
not "conventions" at all, but absolute barriers to
name collision etc.

I think Gord's suggestion of ::nest works just fine,
and addresses the module known elsewhere as "nest".
The full module name of its homograph is "top[nest]"
or possibly "top::nest"; it is NOT accessible globally
(only its instances are via "$root.top.n1").

Greg