Re: UDF description

From: David Miller <David.L.Miller_at_.....>
Date: Tue Nov 10 2009 - 06:29:02 PST
Hello Paul,

Yes, sorry. I saw your original email and noted this down as part of the clean 
up items I am doing. I just forgot to send a response.
Yes that bullet is confusing - all we really wanted to say was the UDF must 
have at least one formal argument.

Your modification is a lot clearer - I will use that as the replacement.

Regards
Dave


Paul Floyd wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I sent this a while back, but never received it from the listserver.
> 
> The LRM 2.3.1 has this to say about UDFs.
> 
> An analog user defined function:
> ...
> — shall have at least one input declared; the block item declaration
> shall declare the type of the inputs
> (whether they are input, output, inout)
> 
> This doesn't seem to be clear English to me, implying that an UDF can
> have an "input" that is an "output". Unless I've misunderstood, wouldn't
> 
> — shall have at least one formal argument declared; the block item
> declaration shall declare the type of the formal arguments
> (whether they are input, output, inout).
> 
> be clearer? (Assuming that "formal argument" doesn't need defining).
> 
> Regards
> Paul Floyd

-- 
==============================================
-- It's a beautiful day
-- Don't let it get away
--
-- David Miller
-- Design Technology (Austin)
-- Freescale Semiconductor
-- Ph : 512 996-7377 Fax: x7755
==============================================

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Tue Nov 10 06:31:44 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 10 2009 - 06:32:01 PST