Francoise Martinolle wrote: > Have we decided whether or not the > class declaration name itself can represent the specialization datatype > of a parameterized class? > > For example: > class C #( parameter p = 0); > endclass > > > C #() myv; // I think that this is legal according to the BNF > C myv; // but is this legal too? > The LRM is pretty clear that references to the parameterized class name cause a default specialization. The only circumstances where this isn't the case is the syntax that I still owe for class_name::function (or task) and the class_name::method_name syntax for extern methods. So both "C myv" and "C#() myv" would be legal and would have identical semantics. 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 Apr 5 13:51:06 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 05 2007 - 13:51:13 PDT