RE: [sv-bc] Naming of unnamed sequential blocks

They were thinking that there are times that you don't want others to
have access to locally declared variables, and other languages get along
fine without having to name locally declared blocks.

When you use the PLI, you use iterators instead of accessing the blocks
by name.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Michael McNamara
> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:50 PM
> To: Vreugdenhil, Gordon
> Cc: SV_BC List
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Naming of unnamed sequential blocks
> 
> 
> Wow.  I would rather that P1800 undo allowing unnamed blocks to
> contain declarations.  What were they thinking...
> 
> If we can't undo that bit of oversight, then I would go for following
> the convention of generate.
> 
> -- On May 17 2005 at 16:31, Gordon Vreugdenhil sent a message:
>  > To: sv-bc@eda.org
>  > Subject: "[sv-bc] Naming of unnamed sequential blocks"
>  > P1800 allows sequential unnamed blocks to have declarations.  There
>  > is no naming convention specified for pli access meaning that
vendors
>  > will almost certainly do varying things.  For unnamed generate
blocks,
>  > 1364-2005 defines an "external name" format and rules for naming
>  > each unnamed block.  Do other people think that we should follow
>  > the same kind of naming convention for sequential blocks?  I think
>  > we should.  If others agree, we might want to at least brainstorm
>  > about some variants to the "external name" rules for sequential
>  > blocks.
>  >
>  > Gord.
>  > --
>  >
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > Gordon Vreugdenhil,  Staff Engineer               503-685-0808
>  > Model Technology (Mentor Graphics)                gordonv@model.com
>  >