Re: errata/192: 3.3.1: are real values for ranges allowed?

From: Brad Pierce (Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com)
Date: Mon Nov 18 2002 - 19:30:13 PST

  • Next message: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com: "editorial errata sub-task force"

    Precedence: bulk

    The following reply was made to PR errata/192; it has been noted by GNATS.

    From: "Brad Pierce" <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com>
    To: <etf-bugs@boyd.com>
    Cc:
    Subject: Re: errata/192: 3.3.1: are real values for ranges allowed?
    Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 19:20:38 -0800

    >Category: errata
    >Confidential: no
    >Originator: "Brad Pierce" <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com>
    >Release: 2001b
    >Class: TBD
    >Description:
     Yes, you're completely right about that.
     
     Regarding syntactic vs. semantic checks, although
     I see some places where the syntactic approach
     still seems more natural, such as --
     
         module_item vs. non_port_module_item
         function_item_declaration vs. task_item_declaration
     
     it does seem there ought to be a better way
     to define what a constant expression is.
     
     -- Brad
     

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 18 2002 - 19:31:45 PST and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.