Gord > I think that issue 51 / Mantis 2724 reflects the > consensus discussion of the meeting. I've uploaded > the proposal and set the priority to immediate. I think the new text might be clearer if the second sentence were split into two, so that the normative rules are kept distinct from the justification. Also, the phrase "user code does not provide an initialization" was never very satisfactory; we're talking about a call to super.new here, whereas "an initialization" generally means something quite different. Could I suggest a change along these lines? If the constructor makes an explicit call to super.new, that call shall be the first statement executed in the constructor. If the constructor does not make an explicit call to super.new then the compiler shall automatically insert a call to super.new, with no actual arguments, as the first statement executed in the constructor. This is because the superclass shall be initialized before the current class. I know it's a bit longer but I think it leaves less opportunity for misinterpretation. On a slightly different issue, I still very much dislike "the first statement executed" because it leaves so much confusion about whether, for example, the super.new call may have a function call as one of its actual arguments. thanks -- Jonathan Bromley Consultant Doulos - Developing Design Know-how VHDL * Verilog * SystemVerilog * SystemC * PSL * Perl * Tcl/Tk * Project Services Doulos Ltd. Church Hatch, 22 Market Place, Ringwood, Hampshire, BH24 1AW, UK Tel: + 44 (0)1425 471223 Email: jonathan.bromley@doulos.com Fax: +44 (0)1425 471573 http://www.doulos.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doulos Ltd is registered in England and Wales with company no. 3723454 Its registered office is 4 Brackley Close, Bournemouth International Airport, Christchurch, BH23 6SE, UK. This message may contain personal views which are not the views of Doulos, unless specifically stated. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Apr 27 13:20:09 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 27 2009 - 13:20:39 PDT