RE: [sv-ec] class_new

That seems reasonable - thanks for the quick turn-around.

I assume that ranges in the "select" rule should be a semantic error, but I wasn't able to find a detailed set of usage restrictions with class handles (e.g., something analagous to section 3.6 for the chandle type). Section 11.4 defines some limitations, but it is much less complete than the rules for chandle.

Regards,
-Jamie

-----Original Message-----
From: David W. Smith [mailto:dwsmith@Synopsys.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 3:27 PM
To: LaFlamme, Jamie; 'sv-ec@server.eda.org'
Subject: RE: [sv-ec] class_new

Hi Jamie,
Please take a look at LRM-302 at http://www.eda.org/sv/LRMChanges_draft6.htm

Regards
David

David W. Smith
Synopsys Scientist
 
Synopsys, Inc.
Synopsys Technology Park
2025 NW Cornelius Pass Road
Hillsboro, OR 97124
 
Voice: 503.547.6467
Main: 503.547.6000
FAX: 503.547.6906
Email: david.smith@synopsys.com
http://www.synopsys.com

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org] On Behalf Of LaFlamme, Jamie
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 10:11 AM
To: 'sv-ec@server.eda.org'
Subject: [sv-ec] class_new

In draft 5 the following BNF:
    
blocking_assignment ::=
        ...
        | class_variable_identifier = class_new

appears to prevent class_new expressions from being assigned to hierachical identifiers, array elements, fields of
struct/union/class objects, etc. Is that an intentional limitation?

Thanks,
-Jamie
Received on Tue Mar 16 17:12:05 2004