Re: to_uint64

Philipp,

As Dave wrote, it also applies to sc_subref_r and sc_concref_r. I've double-checked the OSCI source and made the additions to the LRM.

John A

-----"Philipp A. Hartmann" <philipp.hartmann@offis.de> wrote: -----
To: john.aynsley@doulos.com
From: "Philipp A. Hartmann" <philipp.hartmann@offis.de>
Date: 12/03/2010 08:05PM
Cc: systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org, stuart@cadence.com, david.long@doulos.com
Subject: Re: to_uint64

All,

I think, the last, rather editorial issue that is open and did not get
any discussion could be finalised as well.

  I did have a look at this, and indeed the base classes are missing
these two functions. So let's just add to the sc_bv_base and sc_lv_base
class definitions

  int64 to_int64() const;
  uint64 to_uint64() const;

Objections?

Greetings from Oldenburg,
  Philipp

On 28/11/10 10:44, john.aynsley@doulos.com wrote:
> Stuart, Dave, All,
>
> Some time ago Stuart wrote:
>
> "In the IEEE LRM, sc_lv<> and sc_lv_base don't have conversion function to_uint64(), but these are in the ref sim and are also mentioned in the "common characteristics" section on the data types. Perhaps there are other explicit conversion functions that were inadvertently omitted? "
>
> Do we want to add these to the LRM?
>
> 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.