Re: On pragma Precondition etc.

[mockturtle <framefritti@gmail.com>]

stefan-lu...@see-the.signature ha scritto:

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>
> > We would have something like
> >
> >    function More(X, Y: Integer);
> >    -- ...
> >    pragma Precondition(More, X > 2 * Y);
> >
> >
> >    function Less(X, Y: Integer);
> >    -- ...
> >    pragma Precondition(Less, X < 2 * Y);
> >
> > And now there is no doubt about the subprogram to which a
> > Pre-/Postcondition belongs.  (A rule that a spec Pre-/Postcondition
> > pragma must come right after its subprogram will establish
> > consistency.)
>
> This seems to break with overloading of subprogram names. I seem to recall
> that
>   "pragma Inline(Foo)"
> is asking to inlie *all* functions / procedures with the name "Foo". This
> may be OK for inlining, but you definitively don't want to use the same
> preconditions which happen to have the same way. Consider the following:

What about _allowing_ for the name of the procedure to appear in
the pragma?  The true syntactic link would be given by the pragma
position
and the procedure name would act as a "double check" to be sure that
things were not messed up.  Of course this does not save you if you
permute the pragma of overloaded functions...

---