Re: [sv-bc] Task function identifier searching rule

I concur with Gordon.  The name was already introduced in the scope
when the wildcard import is seen.  Wildcards never perturb names
that already exist in the importing scope.

Greg

Gordon Vreugdenhil wrote:
> import makes names visible at the point of import down; forward
> function references are not sufficient to actually bring the function
> name in from the package.  Imports just create "potentially
> visible" names.  So imports are never considered as late as you
> are suggesting.
> 
> Gord.
> 
> Surya Pratik Saha wrote:
>> One interesting note. One standard simulator behaves as mentioned in LRM
>> example. But failed to get the function call body if the function
>> declaration removed from module body. So it can't get the function body
>> reference from package at all even the import declaration is there. Is
>> it the intended behavior?
>>
>> Regards
>> Surya
>>
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message  --------
>> Subject: [sv-bc] Task function identifier searching rule
>> From: Surya Pratik Saha <spsaha@cal.interrasystems.com>
>> To: sv-bc@eda.org <sv-bc@eda.org>
>> Date: Friday, January 09, 2009 6:34:03 PM
>>> Hi,
>>> As per the SV 2009 draft LRM, task/function identifier has to be
>>> searched in the complete local scope first and then will go to the
>>> scope lexically above. With that algorithm, the example shown in "26.3
>>> Referencing data in packages" is contradictory.
>>>
>>> *Example 3:
>>> package p;
>>> function int f();
>>> return 1;
>>> endfunction
>>> endpackage
>>> module top;
>>> int x;
>>> if (1) begin : b
>>> initial x = f(); // line 2
>>> import p::*; // line 3
>>> end
>>> function int f();
>>> return 1;
>>> endfunction
>>> endmodule
>>>
>>> f() on line 2 binds to top.f and not to p::f since the import is after
>>> the function call reference.*
>>>
>>> If we go by the rule, function 'f' has to be searched in the complete
>>> scope of 'b', and there the import statement is found. So why it will
>>> be bound to 'top.f' is not clear to me. I did not see LRM mentioned
>>> that import statement should be considered after completing the
>>> searching of scope lexically above. Am I missing anything?
>>> --
>>> Regards
>>> Surya
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
>>> believed to be clean. --
>>> This email was Anti Virus checked by Astaro Security Gateway. http://www.astaro.com
>>
>> --
>> 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.
> 


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