Subject: Re: [sv-cc] Minutes for the SV-CC Conference Call @ 22-Apr-2003
From: Andrzej Litwiniuk (Andrzej.Litwiniuk@synopsys.com)
Date: Wed Apr 23 2003 - 10:21:21 PDT
> As National Semiconductor's representive I'd like to record a "NO" vote for the CC committee's
> portion of the LRM - National's needs were not addressed by the committee.
> [...]
>
> Regards,
> Kev.
Dear Kevin,
I do respect your opinion and your right to judge whether National's needs
have been addressed.
I also understand that you would much favour a more object-oriented C++ style
solution.
Do you think it may be conceivable to define C++ layer of DPI,
while sticking to the same SV layer?
I believe that SV side of DPI is very SystemVerilog-ish since it virtually
introduces no new concepts and keeps external function calls undistinguishable
from native calls. On the other hand the actual implementation, linkage
and function call and argument passing protocols are transparent to SV.
So it seems that an alternative, more C++ oriented implementation of the foreign
side of DPI is not unfeasible.
Surely not in 3.1 timeframe, but in the future? Why not?
It might be welcome by SystemC fans ... What do you think?
Regards,
Andrzej
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 10:23:15 PDT