RE: [sv-ec] Default arguments on virtual methods

C was my intent.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
On
> Behalf Of Steven Sharp
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 2:40 PM
> To: sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: [sv-ec] Default arguments on virtual methods
> 
> The LRM allows virtual methods in derived classes to have default
> argument values that do not match the base class.  They are only
> required to match in having or not having a default value.  It is
> not clear what the behavior should be when they do not match.
> 
> Possible interpretations:
> 
> A. Assume that the values were required to match, but it was too
>    hard to specify that in a reasonable way.  Implementations can
>    use the value from whichever declaration is convenient, and produce
>    an error or warning if the value in a derived class does not match.
> 
> B. Use the default value from the static class type of the handle.
> 
> C. Use the default value from the actual class type of the handle,
>    which is the one from the virtual method that is actually called.
>    This makes these defaults "virtual", like the methods.  If it was
>    intended that the values could differ, then I would expect this to
>    be the desired behavior.
> 
> I know this has been brought up before, but it has never been
resolved.
> Given that the behaviors are quite different, it needs to be.
> 
> Steven Sharp
> sharp@cadence.com
> 
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.


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