Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Wrong syntax for import "DPI" ? Missing "function" or superfluous "function"?
From: Warmke, Doug (doug_warmke@mentorg.com)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 14:42:09 PDT
Andrzej,
As I recall, we decided the keyword "function" should be in the syntax.
The reason is that it opens the door to exporting tasks in the future.
At least in a self-documenting style (conceivably it is still possible
to omit either "task" or "function" from import declarations).
Regards,
Doug
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrzej Litwiniuk [mailto:Andrzej.Litwiniuk@synopsys.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 2:32 PM
> To: sv-cc@eda.org
> Subject: [sv-cc] Wrong syntax for import "DPI" ? Missing
> "function" or superfluous "function"?
>
>
> Hi team,
>
> The final syntax for DPI import declaration seems to be inconsistent
> with the examples, or the other way round. Should or should
> not the keyword
> "function" be used in 'import "DPI"'?
>
> The syntax underwent some changes during the editing process.
> I don't know whether those changes are intentional or not,
> and who made them.
> Anyway, the examples of import DPI declarations do not
> conform with the syntax.
>
> The syntax defined in the final version of LRM for import DPI
> function does not
> include the keyword "function", although "function" occurs in
> all examples of
> import "DPI" declarations in the LRM.
>
> Please look at the syntax in 16.1 (page 76) or 26.4.4 (page 240).
>
> dpi_function_proto does not allow to use "function"!
>
> Personally I think that "function" is redundant, so I may be
> only glad that
> the changes in syntax, intentional or not, have removed that keyword.
> As it is now, however, there is a conflict between BNF and
> the examples.
>
> Regards,
> Andrzej
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jul 07 2003 - 14:43:52 PDT