Subject: RE: SV-BC-19 issues
From: Jacobi, Dan (dan.jacobi@intel.com)
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 23:43:41 PST
Yes,
I think the identifier token should be replaced with the
interface_identifier token
(also not in bold text)
this should be more accurate due to the fact that the identifier can only
stand for a
pre-declared interface name. (This should help to implement parsers that use
parse-time name binding methods).
Thanks
Dan Jacobi.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Pierce [mailto:Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 5:35 AM
To: sv-bc@eda.org
Subject: RE: SV-BC-19 issues
Dan,
In issue SV-BC-19-11 regarding the identifiers in interface port
declarations (A.2.1.2),
I think that rather than just being unbolded, they need to be changed to
interface_identifier --
interface_identifier list_of_interface_identifiers
interface_identifer . modport_identifier list_of_interface_identifiers
-- Brad
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org]On Behalf Of Jacobi,
Dan
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 12:43 PM
To: sv-bc@eda.org
Subject: SV-BC-19 issues
Attached is the document I send describing the issued labeled SV BC-19 (SV
BC-19-1 through SV BC-19-69)
This document is was transformed to an html format and includes colors and
other markings, therefore it should be easier to track this document.
This document was previously send in Karen's mail on last September as a MS
word document.
http://www.eda.org/vlog-pp/sv-bc/hm/0055.html
Enjoy
Dan Jacobi - CAD Engineer
Intel Corporation
Mail : Dan Jacobi
Intel Israel (74) LTD.
Mail Stop – IDC-4D
M.T.M Scientific Center
P.O.Box 1659
Haifa 31015
Israel
E-mail : dan.jacobi@intel.com
Tel : (972)-4-8655855
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Nov 11 2002 - 23:44:26 PST