Hello, > It's really great to see all of this activity! > Thanks Tristan!
Well, thank you for reloading ghdl! > A couple of questions if you don't mind; things I don't understand > and > so on. > > ------- from 77dde4 --------------------------- > sem_assocs: add missing set_base_name on formal. > Did you just notice this was missing (I'd never have seen it!) or is > it part of another commit? In fact, I'd like to rework change set 156 & 157: crashes in Get_Kind means there is an issue before. (I will revert the Get_Kind change, as it isn't anymore necessary for the reported issues.) > ------- from 77dde4 --------------------------- > https://sourceforge.net/p/ghdl-updates/code/ci/77dde45d5c939de69f57658cc7b23f4609223802/ > > -- Extract high or low bound of RANGE_VAR, which must be > stable. > -- Put the result into RES. > - procedure Range_To_High_Low > - (Range_Var : Mnode; Res : O_Dnode; Is_High : Boolean) > + function Range_To_High_Low > + (Range_Var : Mnode; Range_Type : Iir; Is_High : Boolean) > + return Mnode > > The comment looks out of date? Yes. > ------- from 1f3238 and c19ce6 --------------------------- > > Adding an "ENTITY" option to various tests ... > > I was in the process of trying to get the entity automatically, e.g. > from recent tests (and checking it's named in an architecture > specification) to limit fiddling with the .exp files. > > Is that still worthwhile or shall I abandon the attempt and follow > this approach? It is up to you. I have modified get_entities (should now be renamed ?) to print the last entity of the file, which is the one at the top of the design. And I added ENTITY when the design must be elaborated from a configuration. I am not sure it is worth trying to improve that. Not very important nor urgent. > (I have added a STOP option to terminate simulation after time T, to > reduce the number of tests we have to fix for infinite sim length) Good, might be useful. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Also I'll add a note to the downstream Debian bug reports that have > now been fixed. Great. I did the same for most gna.org reports. I also plan to revert changeset 135: in fact there was a missing range check during sem. The range is an integer range, and the right bound is clearly out of range. I also have a question about one of your change: --- a/sem_names.adb +++ b/sem_names.adb @@ -1980,8 +1980,8 @@ package body Sem_Names is end; if Res = Null_Iir then Error_Msg_Sem - ("prefix is neither a function name " - & "nor can it be sliced or indexed", Name); + ("No overloaded subprogram found matching " + & Disp_Node (Prefix_Name), Name); end if; when Iir_Kinds_Function_Declaration => Add_Result (Res, Sem_As_Function_Call (Prefix_Name, I wonder wether the message is an improvement or not, as the prefix may not be a function. But I suppose you'd like to display the prefix to make the message clearer ? Regards, Tristan. _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
