Subject: Proposed Annex A.1 syntax updated
From: Graham Helwig (ghelwig@asc.corp.mot.com)
Date: Fri Jul 11 2003 - 00:52:26 PDT
Hello,
Based on the discussion in the previous committee meeting, I have
attached a PDF of the Annex A syntax. The syntax in section A.1 has
been updated. The changes can be discussed in the next meeting and
changed or reverted if required. The syntax updates include:
- The introduction updates to explain the types of syntax items that may
be present.
- The connectmodule syntax merged into the existing 2001 module
declaration syntax.
- Analog block can only appear within module scope and not within
generated items.
- Nature, discipline and connectrules block syntax has been updated to
conform more closely with 2001 syntax.
- Nature attribute_expression syntax item introduced since
constant_expression could not handled "access" and "Xdt_nature"
attribute values.
- Nature attribute syntax items have been updated to avoid
confusion/conflict with 2001 attribute syntax.
- All connectmodule, nature, discipline and connectrules identifiers are
defined in section A.11.3 is the same way as 2001 identifiers are
defined.
NOTE: When the syntax has been finalised any notes (green text) will be
removed.
Here is some more syntax update related questions.
The module/macromodule/connectmodule, connectrules, UDT, analog/digital
UDF and UDP declarations finish the first part of the declaration with a
";", however nature and discipline declarations do not. Should natures
and disciplines use a ";" after the declarations items name to be
consistence with all of the other declarations in the language? For
example:
discipline ttl;
domain discrete;
enddiscipline
The ground_declaration syntax item is currently separate from the 2001
net_declaration syntax item. However like digital net types (wire, wand,
etc.), ground is just another type of net. Should the ground_declaration
syntax item be merged into the 2001 net_declaration syntax item?
Using a similar argument as above, the "net_discpline_declaration"
syntax item can be merged into the 2001 "net_declaration" syntax item.
Should this be done?
The connect module insertion rule currently allows only named parameter
overrides to be used. In the updated syntax, named and ordered parameter
overrides can be used. Not sure why this was restricted. Should this be
reverted back to named parameter overrides only?
In 2001, port declaration may include net type along with direction
information. Should port declarations be extended to include discipline
information also? For example:
module example1(p1,p2,p3);
output reg logic [1:3] p1, p2;
input electrical p3;
...
endmodule
module example2 (output reg logic [1:3] p1, p2, input electrical p3);
...
endmodule
Regards
Graham
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Graham Helwig email: A11558@email.mot.com ghelwig@asc.corp.mot.com Telephone:+61-8-81683532 Fax:+61-8-81683501 Motorola Australia Software Centre, 2 Second Avenue, Mawson Lakes, Adelaide, SA, 5095, Australia -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 11 2003 - 00:53:42 PDT