Subject: Re: Paul_P1
From: Farrell Ostler (Farrell.Ostler@xilinx.com)
Date: Fri Jan 03 2003 - 09:31:46 PST
"Paul J. Menchini" wrote:
> <snip>
>
> As to backwards compatibility, since the current behavior is to treat
> them as errors, I do not feel that it is a problem to make the change.
> We're not changing existing semantics, just enlarging the set of legal
> semantics.
>
> <snip>
I agree with you. Having std_match allow the null-array arguments
would be a simple and desireable approach to backward
compatibility.
It seems unlikely that there are debugged and working models
using std_match that rely on a return
value of FALSE when both arguments are null.
...looks like a case where deciding to not have "absolute" backward compatibility
wouldn't hurt.
Farrell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jan 03 2003 - 09:30:41 PST