A further thought... > 5) if a parameter_port_list is specified by the extern class it > shall be identical to the parameter_port_list specified in > the class declaration. [...] > I don't mind adopting a stronger set of rules with respect > to (4) and (5), namely that the form shall match exactly > rather than saying "match if present". I think I would at this stage prefer to enforce exact match, at least for the parameter_port_list. Otherwise it's conceivable that extern class C; might be ambiguous, since it might represent implementation of extern methods of the default specialisation. Even if that is strictly impossible, the risk of confusion - and the risk of conflict with future, different syntax extensions - suggests we should err on the side of conservatism. -- Jonathan Bromley, Consultant DOULOS - Developing Design Know-how VHDL * Verilog * SystemC * e * Perl * Tcl/Tk * Project Services Doulos Ltd. Church Hatch, 22 Market Place, Ringwood, Hampshire, BH24 1AW, UK Tel: +44 (0)1425 471223 Email: jonathan.bromley@doulos.com Fax: +44 (0)1425 471573 Web: http://www.doulos.com The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the views of Doulos Ltd., unless specifically stated. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Tue Jun 26 04:33:17 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jun 26 2007 - 04:33:31 PDT