From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Date: Sun Feb 22 2004 - 03:10:00 PST
The following reply was made to PR errata/345; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
To: stefen@boyd.com
Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com
Subject: Re: errata/345: 10.2.1, 10.3.1, 12.3.3, 12.3.4 -- ANSI-style port
lists and redeclaration
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:15:47 +0200 (IST)
Stefen,
Please close this issue as a duplicate, as decided by the ETF in the
last meeting.
Thanks,
Shalom
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Shalom Bresticker wrote:
> I believe this duplicates issues 227 and 233.
> Also, similar issues are discussed in 292 and 332.
>
> Shalom
>
>
> Brad Pierce wrote:
>
> > According to 12.3.4, regarding ANSI-style module ports, "Each declared
> > port provides the complete information about the port." According to
> > 12.3.3, if a port declaration does not include a net or variable type,
> > then the port can be again declared in a net or variable declaration."
> >
> > Does this mean that the following is legal? --
> >
> > module m( input x ) ;
> > wire x ;
> > endmodule
> >
> > I think it shouldn't be. If the information is complete, then even
> > redundant declarations should be prohibited.
> >
> > Are there any restrictions on redeclarations of ANSI-style
> > task/function ports? I don't see any restrictions in 10.2.1 and
> > 10.3.1. To me it would make sense if each ANSI-style task/function
> > declaration would provide the complete information about the port
> > and if it would be illegal to redeclare such ports within the body,
> > even redundantly.
--
Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Design & Reuse Methodology Tel: +972 9 9522268
Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 441478
[x]Motorola General Business Information
[ ]Motorola Internal Use Only
[ ]Motorola Confidential Proprietary
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Sun Feb 22 2004 - 03:10:04 PST
and
sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.