Why cant protected type methods have a parameter thats an access type?

[Tricky]

Yes I know "thems the rules", but I want to know why. Theres nothing
wrong with throwing access types around normal functions and
procedures, so why are protected types so special? There also the
issue I raised a long time ago - you're not allowed to make arrays of
protected types or pointers to them? Are they just trying to hobble
VHDL to force you to use another language for modelling and
verification?

So do protected types count as a half implemented feature of VHDL?
(otherwise I love them, and use them lots for data flow modelling).

 

[JimLewis]

Protected types are intended to guarantee atomic access to any
internal data structure. If a subprogram returned a pointer to
the internal data structure, atomic access can no longer be
guaranteed.

Can you share a use model for which you would like to use it.
Use models are part of any change request.

Arrays of protected types and pointers to them would be
interesting. Again, it would be helpful to share a
use model.

So do protected types count as a half implemented feature of VHDL?

With all things VHDL, the initial introduction of a feature
is often done conservatively. I suspect there are a number
of things here that need to change. I started sketching
out some of things I see as problematic:
http://www.eda.org/twiki/bin/view.cgi/P1076/ProtectedTypeUpdates

Anyone doing interesting things with protected types should
join the language committee. At least participate by
writing up or contributing to proposals on the TWIKI.

If you do not have a TWIKI account yet, send an email directly
to me and I will get you set up. Feel free to either add your
own separate proposal or start adding stuff under the one
for Protected Types that I started.

Jim