>From: Gordon Vreugdenhil <gordonv@model.com> >I think we should do this. However I think the naming scheme can >be (and must be!) simpler than the "directly nested conditions" part >of the generate block naming since all sequential unnamed blocks >will exist. I would suggest just numbering starting at 1 within >each scope. Each anonymous scope with a "begin" counts >as do implicit scopes for a for loop with an inline declaration even >if the body of the loop wouldn't otherwise create a scope. ... >Steven, does this match what you would expect? Yes, it matches exactly what I would expect. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Wed Oct 31 13:49:47 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 31 2007 - 13:50:19 PDT