Subject: Re: [sv-cc] Wrong syntax for import "DPI" ? Missing "function" or
From: Andrzej Litwiniuk (Andrzej.Litwiniuk@synopsys.com)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 15:02:42 PDT
> 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.
---------
Doug,
Did you mean "exporting"? If yes, that I'm not convinced.
The syntax for 'export "DPI"' does not require "function" (nor "task" in the
future), because the name of the exported entity specifies unambiguously
whether it is a function or a task.
> At least in a self-documenting style (conceivably it is still possible
> to omit either "task" or "function" from import declarations).
>
> Regards,
> Doug
I merely noticed that the examples do not match the syntax. Or, that the syntax
does not match the examples.
If the change in the syntax was intentional and decided by a 'higher authority',
then the examples need to be updated.
If it happened accidentaly, then let's fix it. Or let's reconsider.
Whatever.
Andrzej
> > -----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 - 15:04:18 PDT