[sv-bc] Unclear LRM example for type compatibilty

From: Surya Pratik Saha <spsaha_at_.....>
Date: Wed Aug 05 2009 - 06:48:53 PDT
Hi,
In SV 2009 draft 7a LRM, section 6.22.2 Equivalent types, there is a big example explaining type compatibility rules in SV. It mentions some rule numbers also, but it is not clear which rule it tries to point out. Also the last assignment as given below marked as illegal, but it is not clear why.

s1.v5 = s2.v5; // illegal - types from s1 and s2 (rule 4)

BTW, none of the standard simulators or synthesis tool fail for the case. I think LRM should correct it.
-- 
Regards
Surya

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean. Received on Wed Aug 5 06:51:44 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 05 2009 - 06:52:45 PDT