sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight, might be a bit insecure, and gotta be right. what does this have to do with the original post or with the comment i was commenting on? so here's the defense: latches are flip-flops despite your claim that they are not. your argument that the code in the original comment is a flip-flop may be more accurate than my quick observation that it is a latch, but the better answer is, "it is a clocked flip-flop". real-world or practicing engineers seek to overcome hurdles--linguistic and otherwise--to close gaps. i'd wager a valuable sum that engineers seeing my first comment would recognize immediately that in calling the code a latch, that i realized its purpose: to preserve the state of a sample input in a pipeline--thus latching on to a value. they would have also forgiven the technical error and probably would have assumed i was accustomed to working in the analog world.
