Re: [sv-bc] Constant method calls

Hi Steven,
Is 'next' method call also allowed? I think no, though the method is 
called on a constant object. Because return value of 'next' is not at 
all constant. I think LRM should provide the list of method can be 
applied in const_expression context to avoid any confusion instead of 
leaving for the vendor tool.

Regards
Surya



-------- Original Message  --------
Subject: Re:[sv-bc] Constant method calls
From: Steven Sharp <sharp@cadence.com>
To: sv-bc@eda-stds.org, sarani@cal.interrasystems.com
Date: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 11:36:44 PM
>> From: Sarani Roy <sarani@cal.interrasystems.com>
>>     
>
>   
>> Since according to LRM "An enumerated type declares a set of integral 
>> named constants."
>> It is not clear to me why we cannot use atleast first() , last() and num()
>> enum methods as constant function call.
>> As pointed out by Gord all the normal rules regarding constant function 
>> behavior would apply to
>> to these function calls.
>>     
>
> While I don't think that there is a technical problem with allowing these
> to be constant functions, I agree with Brad Pierce that the current LRM
> text does not allow them.
>
> Steven Sharp
> sharp@cadence.com
>
>
>   





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