Re: [sv-bc] RE: [sv-ec] Wrong SV code in VMM

From: Gordon Vreugdenhil <gordonv_at_.....>
Date: Fri Jul 18 2008 - 07:07:22 PDT
Bresticker, Shalom wrote:
> But wouldn't people prefer to copy-paste the entire header including the
> defaults, without having to edit them out?

This is exactly the argument that has been made in the past.

I don't have any problem with an LRM definition that would say
that a body default *if present* must match the prototype (or previous
virtual).  That would seem to cover what people in both camps seem to
want.  I'd be in favor of making such a change in the next PAR.

On the original question, I agree with all the other comments that
both of the original VMM code snippets are not legal code in 1800-2005/2009.

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.
Received on Fri Jul 18 07:07:56 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jul 18 2008 - 07:08:18 PDT