Subject: RE: FW: arguments on removal of "static"
From: Francoise Martinolle (fm@cadence.com)
Date: Thu Dec 12 2002 - 09:22:09 PST
The discussion and voting on the removal on static occurred before you were
appointed as a chair. Karen can probably point you to the minutes.
Francoise
'
At 05:48 PM 12/12/2002 +0200, Srouji, Johny wrote:
>Hi Steven,
>
>I don't recall there was a discussion and a voting process followed by a
>decision to remove the "static" keyword from the language. As far as I know,
>there was no official decision to remove it.
>
>I have also forwarded the questions and issues you have raised to Peter who
>has answered them in details. One of the obvious dependencies was that it is
>needed by the testbench committee. I can take the action of verifying the
>details of this dependency w/ their chair. We can also ask Peter to clarify
>some of the issues wrt "static" in our next F2F meeting (or next tele-call).
>
>Regards,
>
>--- Johny.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steven Sharp [mailto:sharp@cadence.com]
>Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:24 AM
>To: sv-bc@eda.org
>Subject: Re: FW: arguments on removal of "static"
>
>I don't believe that Peter has raised any issues that were not already
>discussed by the group before making its decision.
>
>There needs to be a process for fixing significant problems in the 3.0
>specification. This group has agreed that this change should be made.
>Many of this group are representatives from companies that are voting
>members of Accellera. Decisions within Accellera are supposed to be
>made by representatives of the member companies.
>
>I would suggest that everyone working for a member company speak to
>their board representative about a solution for this problem. I can
>see two possible solutions. The first would be to get the Basic
>Committee charter extended to allow us to fix any problems in the
>3.0 specification. If the board is not willing to delegate that power
>to us, a second solution would be to create another committee to make
>the final decision on our recommendations. Such a committee should have
>fair and equal representation from the member companies.
>
>Steven Sharp
>sharp@cadence.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Dec 12 2002 - 09:22:33 PST