I vote yes.
Thanks,
-Bishnupriya
________________________________
From: owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org [mailto:owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org] On Behalf Of john.aynsley@doulos.com
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 12:16 AM
To: jerome.cornet@st.com; systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org; bartv@synopsys.com
Subject: Data pointer with TLM_IGNORE_COMMAND
All,
Personally, I accept Jerome's argument that allowing the GP data pointer to be null when the command is TLM_IGNORE_COMMAND would make more sense and would not cause any serious backward compatibility problems. A similar relaxation of the rules would apply to the GP data length attribute: we would allow it to be 0. (Jerome has already given a detailed analysis on the reflector, which I will not repeat here.)
Do people agree? Votes please.
Thanks,
John A
-- 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.Received on Sun Dec 5 20:58:57 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Dec 05 2010 - 20:59:00 PST