RE: the syntax of PSL prev function

Hi Sitvanit,

Without any other considerations, I don't see how the minor benefit
justifies invalidating all existing PSL code using prev.

-Steve Bailey

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ieee-1850-extensions@eda.org
> [mailto:owner-ieee-1850-extensions@eda.org] On Behalf Of Sitvanit Ruah
> Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 1:37 AM
> To: erichm@cadence.com
> Cc: ieee-1850-extensions@eda.org
> Subject: Fw: the syntax of PSL prev function
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> One of our customers suggested the following new syntax for
> the prev built-in function
> prev[Number](Any_Type)
> that will replace the current syntax
> prev(Any_Type [ , Number]).
>
> I think that it makes sense because numbers and ranges are
> usually enclosed in square brackets and the number parameter
> of prev is the only exception.
> Moreover, the prev function and the next operator are quite
> the same in the eyes of the user. The new syntax suggests
> similar syntax for both.
>
>
> Sitvanit
>
>
Received on Wed Dec 22 07:31:11 2004