Re: [sv-bc] SV-BC42-11: http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html

Subject: Re: [sv-bc] SV-BC42-11: http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html
From: Karen Pieper (Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com)
Date: Thu Mar 06 2003 - 19:14:30 PST

• Next message: Dave Rich: "Re: [sv-bc] SV-42-23 question and clarification"
• Previous message: Jacobi, Dan: "[sv-bc] Proposal for SV-BC-69"
• In reply to: Francoise Martinolle: "[sv-bc] SV-BC42-11: http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html"
• Reply: Karen Pieper: "Re: [sv-bc] SV-BC42-11: http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi, Francoise,

         Thanks for reviewing the changes. If you will note on the
following web page
http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/etfpassed.html in issue 133, the ETF passed
some changes to the precedence table. In particular, ~& and ~| were moved
to the top row
where they are in my proposal.

My action item for this issue was to merge the ETF changes into the SV
table. If you
see any discrepancies, please let us know.

Thanks,

K

At 05:42 PM 3/6/03 -0500, Francoise Martinolle wrote:
>Karen,
>
>I compared the IEEE table page 42 and the SV table changes you want to make.
>there are some operators which we have deleted inthe SV table
>~& (reduction) removed
>~| removed
>
>The second row of the SV table contains more than the IEEE table
>The IEEE table only has:
>+ - ! ~ (unary)
>
>Why are these discrepancies?

• Next message: Dave Rich: "Re: [sv-bc] SV-42-23 question and clarification"
• Previous message: Jacobi, Dan: "[sv-bc] Proposal for SV-BC-69"
• In reply to: Francoise Martinolle: "[sv-bc] SV-BC42-11: http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html"
• Reply: Karen Pieper: "Re: [sv-bc] SV-BC42-11: http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 06 2003 - 19:15:09 PST