[sv-ec] 1900 mantis (checkers): checker in package ?

The "25 Package declarations" section allows to declare checker in a
package.
 
 
Till now I've considered checker as a unit - similar to the other units such
as: module, interface, program, etc.
 
 
Once the module, interface, program, etc. are not allowed to be declared in
a package, there should be no room for checker in a package too, IMHO.
 
Allowing check in package seems to be inconsistent with the rest of the
package-related language rules, it constitute a special exception for
checker only, and will probably result in a chain of special exceptions for
checker only.
The first one is already in a proposal:
 
The 1800-2005 containes rule:
 
    Packages must not contain any processes.
 
which will be broken now with:
 
    Packages may contain processes inside checkers only.
 
 
As for me: the 1800-2005 statement is an one more argument for:
 
- not to allow check declaration in package,
 
or to:
 
- (consider to) allow checker and other units delcarations in package ...
 
 
 
It is also possible that the original motivation for allowing checkers
declarations in package was to allow (other than sequence and property)
declarations specific for checkers (i.e.: checkvars) - to be part of the
package encapsulated definitions.
 
In such case a move of these definitions from checker scope to the sequence
/ property scope shall be considered.
(The sequence and property declarations are already allowed in package. And
they have full parametrization capabilities, so they can be easily connected
with checker interface at the instantiation place.)
 
A checker itself - as a grouping construct - similar to the other grouping
constructs (module, interface, program) do not deserve to be in a package if
the other ones do not deserve the same.
 
 
Regards,
Mirek

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