Re: [sv-bc] Function call without ()

Hi Brad,
I have gone through all links and the latest attachments. But 
unfortunately I could not find proper answer of my question. But let me 
guess, since the call of 'f' is without (), so normal identifier 
searching rule will be applied in this place instead of task/function 
call searching rule. And taking that, my example will fail to find out 
'f' in that scope as it is not yet defined. Please let me know if you 
think otherwise.

Regards
Surya



-------- Original Message  --------
Subject: Re:[sv-bc] Function call without ()
From: Brad Pierce <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com>
To: sv-ec@eda.org, sv-bc@eda.org
Date: Sunday, October 19, 2008 11:00:49 PM
> Surya,
>
> Here are links to the associated Mantis items.  (Access with
> Username/Password = guest/guest.)  See the most recent "Attached Files".
>
>   http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1430
>   http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1809
>   http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2217
>   http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2225
>   
> -- Brad
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Surya Pratik Saha [mailto:spsaha@cal.interrasystems.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 10:16 AM
> To: Brad Pierce
> Cc: sv-ec@eda.org; sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-bc] Function call without ()
>
> Hi Brad,
> I don't have access to the draft 7a. So can you please describe what 
> additional things are mentioned there regarding this.
>
> Regards
> Surya
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message  --------
> Subject: Re:[sv-bc] Function call without ()
> From: Brad Pierce <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com>
> To: sv-ec@eda.org
> Cc: sv-bc@eda.org
> Date: Sunday, October 19, 2008 9:38:58 PM
>   
>> Adding in the SV-EC regarding
>>     
> http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-bc/hm/9007.html
>   
>> .  Some relevant sections in draft 7a are 13.5.5 ("Optional argument
>> list"), 13.7 ("Task and function names"), and 23.8 ("Upwards name
>> referencing").
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> But if a class method even called as forward referenced inside the
>>     
> class
>   
>> without argument, is it an error or not. Normally a function can be 
>> forward referenced. LRM is silent on that. Please consider the case
>>     
> and 
>   
>> let me know whether it is correct or not:
>>
>> module top;
>> class C;
>> task t;
>> int x;
>> x = f; // Here 'f' is a class method declared later.
>> endtask
>> static function int f;
>> return 1;
>> endfunction
>> endclass
>> endmodule
>>
>> Regards
>> Surya
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>>   
>>     
>>> You can read some of the history in
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
> http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_BallotRes_Meeting_April_15_2005_M
>   
>> inutes.txt
>>   
>>     
>>> Look for "Mantis 93".
>>>
>>> -- Brad
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> As per 1800 2005 LRM:
>>>
>>> *12.4.5 Optional argument list
>>> When a void function or class function method specifies no arguments,
>>>       
>
>   
>>> the empty parenthesis, (), following the subroutine name shall be 
>>> optional. This is also true for tasks, void functions, and class 
>>> methods that require arguments, when all arguments have defaults 
>>> specified. It shall be illegal to omit the parenthesis in a directly 
>>> recursive nonvoid function method call that is not hierarchically 
>>> qualified.*
>>>
>>> Why only class methods are relaxed? If general function also used 
>>> without () what is the issue there?
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Regards
>>> Surya
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>     
>
>
>
>
>   




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