Subject: Re: Comments on requirements
From: Kevin Cameron x3251 (Kevin.Cameron@nsc.com)
Date: Tue Aug 20 2002 - 12:54:42 PDT
> From Bassam@novas.com Mon Aug 19 18:04:52 2002
>
> Kevin Cameron wrote:
> > I'm not sure if I'll be able to call in tomorrow. I'd like to know if anyone else
> > is keen to do a C++ (class) based API, or is everyone voting for C?
>
> I think because of legacy code issues (C-kernel simulators etc...) it
> makes sense to start with C, we can always wrap and roll into C++ later
> (granted not the greatest way, but seems like de-facto...).
>
> > Also, does anyone want to be able to call tasks (in interfaces) directly and
> > setup call-backs from interfaces? (this has a bearing on EC proposals)
>
> Kevin, you are talking of SV interfaces ? Why what's the restriction now
> ? I thought you could already call tasks in interfaces (instances). What
> are the alternatives/issues ? Thx!
Yep, SV interface tasks direct from C/C++. Folks keep pushing interfaces as
the logical point to cross language boundaries, but you can only really do
that if you can call the interface tasks direct from the foreign language.
It's cleaner to do it in C++ because you can declare a class equivalent of
the interface and class methods to match the tasks, but I'm sure we can
come up with a name mangling algorithm to do it from C if necessary.
> -Bassam.
Kev.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Aug 20 2002 - 13:01:54 PDT