RE: [sv-ec] Re: Feedback from Freescale on name resolution issues

Ray,

I wouldn't say "to be safe", I said to be explicit. There are more ways
to deal with opaque types, including naming methodologies.

Nonetheless, I agree with you. If we do pass this (local::) enhancement,
your example would be correct and explicit. We might even add a rules to
explicitly disambiguate the meaning of local::this.

	Arturo

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan, Ray [mailto:Ray_Ryan@mentor.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 11:04 AM
To: Vreugdenhil, Gordon; Arturo Salz
Cc: Francoise Martinolle; Michael Burns; Neil.Korpusik@Sun.com; Jonathan
Bromley; sv-ec@eda.org
Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Re: Feedback from Freescale on name resolution
issues

 
> Arturo Salz wrote:
> > I agree with Mike that the one problem is that users have 
> no mechanism 
> > for explicitly referring to the enclosing context. I 
> believe such an 
> > enhancement would be a worthwhile addition that preserves backward 
> > compatibility and user intent. I like Jonathan's idea of 
> re-using the 
> > "local" keyword for this purpose, however, I'd propose we 
> use a more 
> > regular syntax for resolving name: Either local::name or local.name 
> > (my preference is for the former).
> > 
> > I'd also like to point out that it is currently easy for users to 
> > explicitly refer to the properties of the object being 
> randomized by 
> > simply using the same name as the object handle, as in:
> > 
> > 	obj.randomize() with { obj.a < obj.b; }
> > 
> > Since the handle name is local to the scope, the writer has 
> complete 
> > control over its name - as long as it is not the name of 
> property that 
> > happens to be a handle, this will always bind to the object's 
> > properties.
> 
> 
> But that is the kicker -- how does one *guarantee* that the 
> "obj" is NOT a matching property?
> 


So, to be safe one would need to write:

	obj.randomize() with (  local::obj.a  < local::obj.b );


- Ray

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.