Go Back   Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > VHDL
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply

VHDL - Orif Others

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-31-2007, 01:04 AM   #1
Default Orif Others


I find the recent discussion of orif very
interesting. What better way to improve a
language by adding rhyming keywords.

But let's turn our attention to the aggregate
command OTHERS. Clearly we could add the word
MOTHERS; that would be a sort of master copy
of an aggragate that would spawn aggregates.
BROTHERS would inherit certain characteristics
from MOTHERS but not necessarilly the entire
bundle.

There isn't much choice in aggregates, not like
any #if #notif directives. So we should definetely
have our DROTHERS.

I also find that sometimes I want to change a few
items in long aggregate list without hunting down
the exact element, so a SMOTHERS would be ideal,
allowing you to change an element without a double
assignment error.

Nesting too might be useful like your SMOTHERS
BROTHERS. If you don't find that useful, well,
Mom always liked you best.


Brad Smallridge










Brad Smallridge
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2007, 09:57 PM   #2
Andy
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Orif Others
Thanks for the humor! We could use some around here...

Andy



Andy
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2007, 12:35 PM   #3
Brian Drummond
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Orif Others
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:04:54 -0700, "Brad Smallridge"
<> wrote:

>I find the recent discussion of orif very
>interesting. What better way to improve a
>language by adding rhyming keywords.
>
>But let's turn our attention to the aggregate
>command OTHERS. Clearly we could add the word
>MOTHERS; that would be a sort of master copy
>of an aggragate that would spawn aggregates.
>BROTHERS would inherit certain characteristics
>from MOTHERS but not necessarilly the entire
>bundle.


Good discussion...

having used VHDL for a few years now, and growing dissatisfied at C/C++
for code on the host system, I have recently started looking at ADA.
I've always been put off ADA because it is so "large and complex" ...
well, C++ has changed all that, and ADA now looks remarkably compact, at
least in comparison. Its similarity to VHDL probably helps, too.

Instead of the mutual exclusivity thing, software programming languages
face a similar issue in the decision between complete evaluation or
short-circuit evaluation of boolean expressions.

ADA's answer is to offer both ... "AND" and "OR" provide full
evaluation, while short circuit evaluation is provided by the keywords
"AND THEN", and "OR ELSE"

So a valid logical expression could be

the_bill_is_paid OR ELSE well_send_the_boys_round

- Brian


Brian Drummond
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46