Re: [sv-bc] Please respond with your #1 SV-BC enhancement priority (due by end of January)

From: Greg Jaxon <Greg.Jaxon@synopsys.com>
Date: Thu Jan 28 2010 - 10:51:20 PST
I apologize for not knowing the Mantis # for this issue.
My opinion is not a Synopsys position - JMHO.

Instance-specific type identities for the non-class (i.e. purely structural) types was a serious mistake.
Specialization-specific identities suffice to make these types safe and far more portable.

Relating this to Mr. Williams' notion of "usage levels", I'd observe that synthesis systems
(which so far lack dynamic, classed, objects) only implement specialization-specific
type identities.  If SV is ever to be about design reuse, we need a way to
instantiate interchangeable parts of a common structural type.  This cannot be done
if the types themselves are unique to each instance  in which they occur.

Greg

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean. Received on Thu Jan 28 10:51:54 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 28 2010 - 10:52:04 PST