Subject: Re: [sv-bc] 18.5.1-2, modports -- proposal
From: Francoise Martinolle (fm@cadence.com)
Date: Thu Feb 27 2003 - 09:09:28 PST
Brad,
then if my understanding is correct, I question why we would need to put
the full prototype
on the import declaration. It seems illogical to me. I think it is more
logical to say that
the full prototype is required on the export declaration if a module has to
export the tasks/functions declarations defined within it through the
interface so that another module can import and use the tasks.
Currently the proposal is the other way around.
Francoise
'
At 02:15 PM 2/26/2003 -0800, Brad Pierce wrote:
>Francoise,
>
>I agree with each of your points and so would like to add
>the following to my initial proposal:
>
>-----------------------------------------
>
>In the example of 18.5.1, REPLACE --
>
> memMod mem(sb_intf.slave); // only has access to the slaveRead task
> cpuMod cpu(sb_intf.master); // only has access to the masterRead task
>
>WITH --
>
> memMod mem(sb_intf);
> cpuMod cpu(sb_intf);
>
>---
>
>In the example of 18.5.2, REPLACE --
>
> memMod mem(sb_intf.slave); // only has access to the slaveRead task
> cpuMod cpu(sb_intf.master); // only has access to the masterRead task
>
>WITH --
>
> memMod mem(sb_intf.slave); // only has access to the slave tasks
> cpuMod cpu(sb_intf.master); // only has access to the master tasks
>
>-----------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Feb 27 2003 - 09:21:01 PST