I checked and found that 'part-select' and 'bit-select' are used consistently. 'Slice' seems also used consistently. Shalom ________________________________ From: Feldman, Yulik Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 5:31 PM To: Bresticker, Shalom Cc: 'sv-bc@server.eda.org' Subject: RE: [sv-bc] confusion in determining the type of an self determined binary expression during evalution of type operator Yes, and somebody has to clean this mess. The definitions as they appear right now have little sense and, not surprisingly, are not used consistently through the LRM. For example, the 7.4.6 section with its definitions of part-select, slice, slice name and indexed name, creates such a big confusion that any further references to these terms leave the reader in complete prostration. Not surprisingly, the terms like "slice name" are not even used anywhere aside their definition. The presence of additional related definitions in other sections makes the situation even worse. The LRM should have been defined a single term, like "select", or "part select", or even "slice" to refer universally to any kind of "select" and then should have used this term everywhere. Perhaps it would be OK to have a couple of specialized terms likes "field select" to ease explanation in certain cases, but in majority of references a single general term should have been used, to avoid confusion. --Yulik. ________________________________ From: Bresticker, Shalom Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:40 AM To: Feldman, Yulik Cc: sv-bc@server.eda.org Subject: RE: [sv-bc] confusion in determining the type of an self determined binary expression during evalution of type operator 7.4.6 defines 'part-select' and 'slice'. 11.5.1 defines 'bit-select' and 'part-select'. 11.5.3 defines 'field select' and 'indexing select'. 11.5.3 uses 'array select', but that is not used elsewhere. Table 10-1 use 'Array element select' but 'element select' is not used elsewhere. 'member select' is not used anywhere. 9.2.2.1 uses 'select expression'. 11.5.3 uses 'select'. Shalom [Yulik] The problem here is that the LRM is very confusing on the definition of the related terminology. I have tried to raise this issue in the past, but it didn't get much attention. The end result is that I and all my colleagues just use the "part select" term as a universal term describing any kind of "select"/"slice"/"part select"/"bit select"/"member select", even that we know that strictly speaking LRM assigns some other mysterious meaning to this term. It looks that you're using the term "select" for such a universal meaning; but I don't think LRM clearly defines it as such either. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Israel (74) Limited This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Oct 18 13:18:38 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 18 2007 - 13:18:47 PDT