RE: [sv-cc] Question on errata 53

Hmm, this seems like a nontrivial problem that needs
resolution. From note 2 in the existing 31.15, it
seems clear that the only things vpiImport can return
are objects that can be declared in packages. In
fact, an "instance" is definitely not one of those.
So it appears we need to establish a dotted-line object
to represent a "package item".

One could reestablish the dotted line around the objects
in subsection 31.2 and call it a "package item", but that
would be confusing when referenced from a module, interface,
or program.

Incidentally, I noticed that the old name was "instance
items" in 31.2 but only "instance item" in 31.15.

A further question on Note 2: It says that vpiImport
returns only the items made visible by an import
statement. But package items can also be made
visible by referencing them via their full names
(such as "q::c") in the SystemVerilog source. Did
we want such referenced objects to be included in
the objects that vpiImport returns or not?

Regards,
Jim V.

---------------------------------------------------------
James H. Vellenga 978-262-6381
Engineering Director (FAX) 978-262-6636
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. vellenga@cadence.com
270 Billerica Rd
Chelmsford, MA 01824-4179
"We all work with partial information."
----------------------------------------------------------
  
 

] -----Original Message-----
] From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On
] Behalf Of Stuart Sutherland
] Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 11:54 PM
] To: sv-cc@eda.org
] Subject: [sv-cc] Question on errata 53
]
]
] Errata #53 removed the named class "instance items". Figure 31.15
] references this object. Should it be deleted from 31.15, or
] renamed to
] "instance"? This can be corrected as a bug note to #53 or
] #77. I would
] prefer 77, as it only effects figure 31.15, so the note won't
] get lost in
] noise.
]
] Stu
] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
] Stuart Sutherland
] stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
] +1-503-692-0898
]
]
]
]
]
Received on Wed Jan 12 08:12:52 2005