Date: Thu Aug 04 2011 - 05:45:38 PDT
Vitaly,
Before you were able to join the meeting yesterday, Arnab and Arturo both raised an issue of consistency in the treatment of task or function arguments and return values. In particular, for many types, DPI-OO treats the argument or return value representations in the intermediate layer quite differently than DPI-C does when communicating with C code.
I jotted down especially the following:
-- dynamic arrays (referring perhaps to "open array" arguments)
-- enum types
-- logic types
Arnab and Arturo pointed out that some users might well want to convert DPI-C declarations to DPI-OO declarations instead, and it would be easier not to have to recode the corresponding C/C++ routines.
I mentioned I would pass on their concerns, and later in the meeting someone asked that I include the sv-cc alias in this note.
Perhaps it would help to answer the following questions:
-- What are the reasons for the differences?
-- Can the representations be made more nearly consistent?
Arnab and Arturo, feel free to add more specifics.
Jim V.
Jim Vellenga | Senior Member of Technical Staff | Cadence
P: 978.262.6015 F: 978.262.6636 www.cadence.com<http://www.cadence.com>
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
