[sv-bc] 2097 comments/thoughts

At the last meeting, I mentioned that I wanted to have the chance
to review 2097 one more time.  I think that the proposal mostly
matches what I expected.  There is one case that could be
arguable based on the proposal.

   module top;
     class C; static int x; endclass
     C c = new;
     initial force c.x = 1;         // legal?
   endmodule

It isn't immediately obvious that the use of the term "variable"
is intended to permit the above.

I think that it is pretty easy to argue that this should be
allowed since "x" is really the same as a distinct variable
declaration; it is primarily its name scoping that is different.

So, two aspects -- first, does everyone agree that forcing a
static class property should be legal?  Second, if you do
agree, do we need to clarify that in 2097 (or elsewhere)?

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.