RE: sc_event_and_list and sc_event_or_list

David,

About sc_event inheriting from sc_object, Cadence has already presented a sc_event naming proposal to this forum (you should be able to find it in the archives) where sc_event does not derive from sc_object. Just FYI.

Thanks,
-Bishnupriya

________________________________
From: owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org [mailto:owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org] On Behalf Of David C Black
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 12:28 AM
To: systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org
Subject: RE: sc_event_and_list and sc_event_or_list

I've been going through the archived messages and I'm not sure I've seen any conclusion to this thread.

I would like to second the motion of making these two classes publicly constructible (and perhaps copyable). These are very handy constructs. We don't need to add features. Just make it easier for users to utilize without resorting to nasty workarounds.

I would also like to oppose the idea of making sc_event inherit from sc_object. Why? Because then you can't create them after elaboration as some code currently does. If you want to give names to events, perhaps adding a name field would be reasonable (or an new "sc_dynamic_object" class that is constructible during simulation).

------------------------------------------------------
David C Black, XtremeEDA ESL Practice Leader
http://www.Xtreme-EDA.com
(Consulting, Services & Training for all your ESL, verification and DFT needs)
Voice: 512.850.4322 Skype:dcblack FAX: 888.467.4609

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
believed to be clean.
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.