Re: write-up for discussion of keyword for kinds of data

From: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com
Date: Thu May 27 2004 - 06:21:45 PDT

  • Next message: Kathy McKinley: "datatypes meeting today"

    Dave,

    > Attached for our discussion today is my write-up describing
    > orthogonality between kinds and data types.
    > Also attached is my earlier e-mail to Kurt that hat a complete example

    I read your write-up. I probably did not understand 100% everything on a
    first reading, at least not as you intended it, but anyway...

    A problem I see with having 'reg' as a data type instead of a data kind
    is that a generation of engineers has been taught to contrast wires and
    regs. Now you would get that 'wire' is essentially the same as
    'wire reg'. That would be terribly confusing.

    Personally I never had much of a problem with confusing 'reg' with
    'register'. I looked at 'reg' as being similar to 'register' as being a
    variable that gets assigned a new value at a specific time and retains
    that value until assigned a new value.

    To change that now is unwise, I think.

    Shalom 

    -- 
Shalom Bresticker                         Shalom.Bresticker @freescale.com
Design & Reuse Methodology                            Tel: +972 9  9522268
Freescale Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                  Fax: +972 9  9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                      Cell: +972 50 5441478

    [ ]Freescale Internal Use Only
[ ]Freescale Confidential Proprietary

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 27 2004 - 06:01:55 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.