Alsop, Thomas R wrote: > Brad, I think you are making a good point that the escaped identifier > should be interpreted, per your example, as not having any white space. > The example you are using is creating a half token example. If the > white space wasn’t stripped out, yes you wouldn’t violate 21.5.1, but > you would compile fail after the text is replaced with the wire > assignment. IMHO, this white space stripping proposal is the correct > implementation even WRT to your escaped identifier example. If you have > an escaped identifier as a macro replacement, the end user must be smart > enough to recognize the implications of escaped identifiers, i.e. you > must have white space to terminate it. I constantly emphasize this in > my classes. Thus if macros are using escaped identifiers and > _/terminating/_ with them, the usage of that macro better dang well have > the terminating spaces, or you have screwed yourself. I completely disagree with this. Please see my response to Brad. Requiring such an interpretation would break existing code. `define ONE_PLUS(x) 1+x module m; int \y , z; initial z = `ONE_PLUS(\y ); endmodule This is legal currently and if your intent is to make this illegal, I am going to oppose the change. Gord. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.Received on Thu Dec 6 12:41:32 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 06 2007 - 12:41:41 PST