From: Stefen Boyd (stefen@boyd.com)
Date: Fri Feb 06 2004 - 09:56:25 PST
This bounced...
>Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:20:39 -0800
>From: mail <mail@boyd.com>
>Subject: Failed bug submission from Kausik Datta
><kausikd@cal.interrasystems.com>, kausikd@cal
>
> >From kausikd@cal.interrasystems.com Fri Feb 6 00:20:39 2004
>Received: from cal.interrasystems.com ([203.200.181.200])
> by wa.boyd.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i168KaKk028407
> for <btf-bugs@boyd.com>; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:20:37 -0800
>Received: from cal.interrasystems.com (lily [192.192.164.72])
> by cal.interrasystems.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA26084;
> Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:01:32 +0530 (IST)
>Message-ID: <402350E3.9000701@cal.interrasystems.com>
>Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:01:31 +0530
>From: Kausik Datta <kausikd@cal.interrasystems.com>
>Reply-To: kausikd@cal.interrasystems.com
>Organization: Interra Systems India Pvt. Ltd.
>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.0.1)
>Gecko/20020920 Netscape/7.0
>X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: btf-bugs@boyd.com
>Subject: : Use of unsized constant number in concat
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Hi,
>
>Section 4.1.14 of IEEE 1364-2001 LRM says
>"Unsized constant numbers shall not be allowed in concatenations. This
>is because the size of each operand in the concatenation is needed to
>calculate the complete size of the concatenation."
>But table 29 of sec 4.4.1 says that the bit length of Unsized constant
>number is same as integer.
>
>In this scenario I think this paragraph at sec 4.1.14 is not required
>and concat like {9, 5} should be valid.
>Please suggest.
>
>Thanks
>Kausik
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Fri Feb 06 2004 - 09:47:46 PST
and
sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.