John,
I vote yes.
Tor
--- Tor Jeremiassen, Ph.D. Simulation and Modeling CTO SDO Foundational Tools Texas Instruments Ph: 281 274 3483 P.O. Box 1443, MS 730 Fax: 281 274 2703 Houston, TX 77251-1443 Email: tor@ti.com<mailto:tor@ti.com> ________________________________ 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 Mon Dec 6 18:56:21 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Dec 06 2010 - 18:56:23 PST