Steven Sharp wrote: > I think I agree with Gordon and Arturo on the original question. > > On a related note, what constitutes a sufficient reference to a package > to cause it to be elaborated into a design? This is similarly visible > via static initializers (including ones in class types for types referenced > only in the package). Is a wildcard import statement sufficient, or does > a symbol actually have to be imported from the package? Steven, it is really hard to come up with a "great" answer on this. I think that any reference to a package, even a wildcard with no actual symbol imports is sufficient. I consider the question to be weakly related to whether the module should be recompiled if the package changes. Since the answer to that is "yes", it seems that the package should be related to the use, even if the use is a wildcard reference. Since there is a "use", the package should participate in elaboration. In practice I think that this poses the least "surprise" for users since one can then say "you reference a package, it is in the design" rather than arguing about weird cases (references in only a dead generate maybe?). Having the most predictable dependencies is, I think, the best for the users. Gord. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Oct 30 17:56:53 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 30 2008 - 17:57:26 PDT