RE: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] Size method for fixed-sized arrays?

IMHO, there should be no differences in any operations using unpacked
array types except in those operations that could affect the size of the
array (as well as potential differences in access to individual elements
via PLI/DPI/pass by ref). 

I think in P1800-2008 (certainly 2009 now) we took many steps in that
direction, but there are many steps left to go.

Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org]
On
> Behalf Of Jonathan Bromley
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 7:37 AM
> To: stuart@sutherland-hdl.com; sv-bc@server.eda.org;
sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] Size method for fixed-sized arrays?
> 
> Stu,
> 
> > A question just came up in a class that I'm teaching as to
> > why we have not added a .size method to fixed size arrays.
> 
> We already have something of a farrago with the assorted
> method and systf syntax for various built-in things.
> Any change at this stage would likely open a big can of
> worms.  If we allow fixed_size_array.size(), then why
> not .increment(), .left() and so forth?  What would happen
> if you have a packed struct with a member called "size"?
> (Is that legal?)  The packed struct is also a vector,
> so presumably it has a size...
> 
> Method-like syntax has the benefit that it reduces
> pollution of the systf namespace and consequent risk
> of collision with user-defined PLI names.  Apart from
> that, it is just a different way of writing a function
> call.  Take your pick at the Alice's Restaurant that
> is SystemVerilog.
> --
> Jonathan Bromley, Consultant
> 
> DOULOS - Developing Design Know-how
> VHDL * Verilog * SystemC * e * Perl * Tcl/Tk * Project Services
> 
> Doulos Ltd. Church Hatch, 22 Market Place, Ringwood, Hampshire, BH24
1AW,
> UK
> Tel: +44 (0)1425 471223                   Email:
> jonathan.bromley@doulos.com
> Fax: +44 (0)1425 471573                           Web:
> http://www.doulos.com
> 
> The contents of this message may contain personal views which
> are not the views of Doulos Ltd., unless specifically stated.
> 
> --
> 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.