Brad Pierce wrote: > Thanks, Gord. Then let's resolve the philosophy first. For the reasons > in > > http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-bc/hm/6429.html > > don't we generally have to wait until elaboration? For example, a local > type could be a redeclaration of a type from a parameterized interface > > module mod(IFC ifc, ...); > typedef ifc.T T; > ... > endmodule > > so the name resolution algorithm must be able to take that into account. Perhaps. You should review the rules that I suggested a long time ago to see how I suggested such issues be resolved. I've given and responded to such issues a number of times and don't want to rehash all of that yet again. Please see (at least) http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-bc/hm/6016.html I have *never* suggested that elaboration doesn't play a role; such a position would clearly be untenable. I have said that the *kind* of name (topological or otherwise) and the *legality* of name declarations (in terms of conflicts) should be determinable at compile time. With Mark's proposals, that does not hold. 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.Received on Thu Aug 30 20:40:04 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 30 2007 - 20:40:12 PDT