Re: [sv-ec] Missing BNF for parameterized virtual interfaces

>You are not specializing the modport, you are specializing the
>interface.  What's the argument from first principles for a syntax that
>separates the parameter value assignment from what it is specializing?

Well, not only is there no precedent for breaking up something that
looks like a hierarchical identifier this way, but it looks really
ugly and makes it easy to visually miss the modport qualifier.  It
doesn't look bad with your simple example, but what about something
more realistic, like

  virtual ifc#(.data_width(MY_DATA_WIDTH),
               .addr_width(MY_SELECT_WIDTH+MY_ADDR_WIDTH),
               .delay(MY_DELAY)).mp v;

Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com