RE: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot: respond by Dec 3, 8am PST

From: Brad Pierce <Brad.Pierce_at_.....>
Date: Wed Nov 28 2007 - 09:20:10 PST
If no pound (#) sign

   module M import p1::*, p2::* ();

then it would be clearer to write

   module M import(p1::*, p2::*) ();

and within the import(), to allow p1 to be shorthand for p1::*.

   module M import(p1, p2) ();

-- Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
Gordon Vreugdenhil
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:13 AM
To: Heath Chambers
Cc: 'Maidment, Matthew R'; sv-bc@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot: respond by Dec 3, 8am PST



Heath Chambers wrote:
>  > >SVDB  329 ___Yes   _X_No    
>  > >http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=329
> 
> Same as Gord's reason AND
> I don't like the semicolons in the middle of a 
> module/interface/program declaration.
> My second issue is a weak objection as I feel the feature needs to be 
> added, so I will change my vote to yes if the BNF fixed and there 
> isn't enough consensus to change to either comma or no separator 
> (other than requiring a parameter and/or port list after the imports).


Heath, the issue of the ";" separator in the middle came up here in some
local discussions too.

Since the package_import_declaration allows a comma separated list of
package items:
      package_import_item { , package_import_item } if we want to go to
a single import form we could restructure the grammar a bit:

      import_and_items ::=
         import package_import_item { , package_import_item }

      package_import_declaration ::= import_and_items ;

      header_import_declaration ::= import_and_items

We could then allow just a single "header_import_declaration" rather
than a list and restructure the example to just use the single import.
I would be Ok with that change.  I wouldn't like to end up with multiple
"import" keywords in a comma separated list.

So I am Ok with:
      module M import p1::*, p2::* ();
but don't really like:
      module M import p1::* import p2::* ();


If there is a stronger consensus on the above suggestion, I'd be fine
with that.

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.


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Wed Nov 28 09:20:42 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Nov 28 2007 - 09:20:52 PST