Re: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ac] New keywords in SV-AC proposals

But adding "next" also invalidates the LRM itself (including 2005) in
the builtin "Iterator" class which has:

class List_Iterator#(parameter type T);
    extern function void next();
    extern function void prev();
    extern function int neq( List_Iterator#(T) iter );
    extern function int eq( List_Iterator#(T) iter );
    extern function T data();
endclass


Gord.


Brad Pierce wrote:
> Steven,
> 
> Thanks for running those tests.  Important data.  Just a short note 
> about your last point --
> 
> The existing built-in enum method 'next()' needn't be a backward 
> compatibility problem for a new keyword 'enum'.  See friendly amendment 
> in bullet 11 here 
> <http://www.eda-stds.org/sv/sv-champions/hm/att-0340/pierce_email_vote_Feb2308.txt>.
> 
> See also
>  
>    http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ac/hm/5668.html
> 
> -- Brad
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of 
> Steven Sharp
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 1:52 PM
> To: stuart@sutherland-hdl.com; sv-bc@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org; 
> sv-cc@eda.org; sv-ac@eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ac] New keywords in SV-AC proposals
> 
> 
>  >From: "Stuart Sutherland" <stuart@sutherland-hdl.com>
> 
>  >I am very concerned about some of the proposed new keywords, specifically:
>  >
>  >  checker, free, global, implies, let, next, restrict, strong, until,
>  > weak
>  >
>  >These are common English words that are likely to be in use as
>  >identifiers in existing code.
> 
> I have tried compiling a suite of 88 customer designs with these 
> keywords reserved in our parser.  18 (or 20%) fail to compile.  This 
> figure may be somewhat low, since some of these testcases appear to have 
> been run through obfuscators before being given to us.
> 
> The offending keywords were:
> 
> next:           7 testcases
> free:           7 testcases
> global:         4 testcases
> checker:        1 testcase
> weak:           1 testcase
> 
> Note that the numbers do not add up to 18 testcases, because some 
> testcases failed with conflicts on more than one keyword.
> 
> Also note that 'next' is particularly problematic, since it is already 
> used as an identifier in a built-in method in SV.  One of these customer 
> tests was SV and ran into this issue.
> 
> Steven Sharp
> sharp@cadence.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* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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.