Re: sc_digit

John,

I would prefer to add sc_digit as

  typedef implementation-defined-unsigned-integral-type sc_digit;

to the LRM.

No other uses instead of the both cases you mention.

Thanks,
  Philipp

On 25/11/10 11:39, john.aynsley@doulos.com wrote:
> Folks,
>
> A while back, there was a discussion on the LWG reflector on the impact of
> porting the OSCI sim to 64 bits. The specific issue raised was the change
> in the argument type of sc_value_base::concat_get_data and concat_get_ctrl
> from unsigned long* to the new type sc_digit.
>
> Do we want to make this change in the LRM in the definition of
> sc_value_base (8.4.2) and also add type sc_digit ?
>
> Should sc_digit be mentioned anywhere else in the LRM?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John A
>
>
>
>

-- 
Philipp A. Hartmann
Hardware/Software Design Methodology Group
OFFIS Institute for Information Technology
R&D Division Transportation · FuE-Bereich Verkehr
Escherweg 2 · 26121 Oldenburg · Germany · http://www.offis.de/
Phone/Fax: +49-441-9722-420/282 · PGP: 0x9161A5C0 · Skype: phi.har

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.