[sv-bc] Merged LRM review 3.8 - compile/elaboration

Generally, I thought that the 3.8 section was quite good.  The
wording is fairly careful about indicating that compilation
and elaboration can be intermingled.

A couple of comments.  First, the following could be a
bit misleading:

    Beyond the rules defined for compilation units (see 3.8.1), this
    standard does not define how implementations should perform
    compilation and elaboration.

There are other places in which behavior is specified in
algorithmic manners.  For example, the rules for upwards name
resolution really do define a "how".  So do the net resolution
rules for determining the dominating net type and the rules
for generate instantiations.  There are likely to be other examples
if the elab-time assertions come into play.  I assume that
this comment was addressing just the "file" semantics of compilation
units, but I think that the reference here is a bit too subtle.

I think that I'd like to rephrase this a bit and tie it in
with the subsequent note:

    NOTE—throughout this standard, the terms compilation, compile and
    compiler often refer to the combined compilation and elaboration
    process.


Perhaps something like the following:

    Although this standard defines the results of compilation and
    elaboration, the compilation and elaboration steps are not
    required to be distinct phases in an implementation.  Throughout
    this standard the terms compilation, compile and compiler normally
    refer to the combined compilation and elaboration process.  So,
    for example, when the standard refers to a "compile time error",
    an implementation is permitted to report the error at any time prior
    to the start of simulation.

The "file" semantics of compilation units really addresses a
different issue -- that SV normally doesn't care about order
and context of design unit compilation except in a couple
of cases.  3.8.1 deals with a context issue; the main ordering
requirement is in 25.2.1 where it is clearly stated that packages
must "exist" before their items are referenced.  Perhaps the "exist"
should be modified there to read "compiled" with a bit of discussion
that this really does mean "compiled" and not the weaker "compiled or
elaborated" interleaving that is normally permitted.  In reality this
gets into library issues and since SV doesn't really have a strong
library concept, it is difficult to be precise.

I think that we could address both issues by adding something
like the following:

    This standard does not normally specify requirements regarding the
    order of compilation for design units.  The two exceptions are
    the rules regarding "compilation units" (see 3.8.1) where
    actual file boundaries during compilation are significant, and the
    rules regarding references to package items (see 25.2.1) where
    the compilation of a package is required to precede references to it.

Gord
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Vreugdenhil                                503-685-0808
Model Technology (Mentor Graphics)                gordonv@model.com


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.