RE: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote: Closes 12am PST December 15 2007

 > Behalf Of Gordon Vreugdenhil 
> I addressed that aspect earlier -- "this" is special in that 
> it is the "object on which the method is invoked".  The fact 
> is that "this.x" is (normally) just a pseudonym for "x" if 
> "x" is a member of the class.  The interpretation that you 
> and Arturo are suggesting changes that natural expectation 
> but ONLY in the context of an inline constraint -- which is 
> also the only place in which "this" could conceivably have 
> two meanings.
> Since "x" can go either way, I believe that it would be much 
> more surprising to find that it can't.

I am surprised at this. I thought your original issue was that you
wanted to make name binding more deterministic. In this case you 
are arguing for less deterministic name binding.  Consider this
pathological example:

class A;
  int x, y;
endclass

class B;
  int x;
endclass

class C #(type TP);
   function void doRand(TP v);
     v.randomize with { this.x < this.y; };
   endfunction

   int x, y;
endclass

C #(A) c1 = new;
C #(b) c2 = new;

A a = new;
B b = new;

initial 
begin
   c1.doRand(a);  // In c1, 'this.y' binds to field 'y' of class 'A'
   c2.doRand(b);  // In c2, 'this.y' binds to field 'y' of class 'C'
end

Is this the type of non-deterministic binding you really want?


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