RE: [sv-bc] Email voting on all open proposals closing 3/15/03 - Danny's Vote

Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Email voting on all open proposals closing 3/15/03 - Danny's Vote
From: Jacobi, Dan (dan.jacobi@intel.com)
Date: Thu Mar 13 2003 - 12:10:15 PST

Next message: Brad Pierce: "[sv-bc] Tasks with null statement (;) as body"
Previous message: David W. Smith: "[sv-bc] BNF Change tracking"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

I mainly looked at the BNF related issues.
In all issues that are not listed in this following E-mail I abstain.

Danny

My votes :
-----
__Yes __No SV-BC70: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0477.html>
http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0477.html
I vote YES for the first part ONLY.

"In A.9.3, I think type_declaration_identifier needs to be changed
from
      type_declaration_identifier ::=
                  type_identifier { packed_dimension }
to
     type_declaration_identifier ::=
                  type_identifier { unpacked_dimension }
"

I vote NO on the second part

"Also, in SV-BC-55 and SV-BC62b, I think 'type_declaration_identifier'
needs to be replaced with 'type_identifier'."

I think this will disable parsing such a typedef
typedef reg[10:0] reg_array_10_0;

---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC73: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0508.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0508.html I vote YES, however I suggest to add the following foot-note to the implicit_base_binary_number production "The tick (') in implicit_base_binary_number shall not be preceded or followed by white_space." ---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC74: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0511.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0511.html ---- __Yes __No SV-BC81: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0518.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0518.html We already ACCEPTED this one by voting on in on 03/03/03 ---- __Yes _X_No SV-BC78: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0530.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0530.html The proposal does not match the BNF all task prototypes must have at least one argument (this is not the case with function prototypes) The Example : import task masterRead(), task masterWrite()); The BNF named_task_proto ::= task_identifier ( task_proto_formal { , task_proto_formal } ) In case the BNF needs to be adjusted let me know and I will gladly update the BNF and and the update to the proposal. ---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC81-1: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0535.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0535.html I vote yes, however this was already fixed in the BNF draft 1 of SV 3.1 Draft 3 (http://boyd.com/sv <http://boyd.com/sv> ) ---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC82: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0538.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0538.html ---- __Yes _X_No SV-BC83: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0539.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0539.html Looking at this issue it looks like the example in page 191 (draft 3) is not correct the the functions Read and Write should be declared as extern in the simple_bus interface. The reason I'm voting against this proposal, is that the BNF is not aligned to the last changes I think the proposal should read under A.1.6 ADD external_declaration ::= 'extern' 'function' named_function_proto ';' | 'extern' ['forkjoin'] 'task' named_task_proto ';'

REPLACE interface_item ::= port_declaration ';' | non_port_interface_item WITH interface_item ::= port_declaration ';' | non_port_interface_item | external_declaration ---- __Yes _X_No SV-BC84: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0557.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0557.html This problem is covered by the proposal for SV-BC-19-60 (P-0598) On 03/03/03 we (SV-BC) decided to change the proposal. ---- __Yes __No SV-BC42-33: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0568.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0568.html

I will not vote against if we change the original proposal to

continuous_assign ::= *assign* [ drive_strength ] [ delay3 ] list_of_net_assignments *;* | *assign* [ delay_control ] list_of_variable_assignments *;* list_of_net_assignments ::= net_assignment { *,* net_assignment } net_assignment ::= net_lvalue *=* expression list_of_variable_assignments ::= variable_assignment { *,* variable_assignment }

Removing the variable_assignment from the original proposal. The variable_assignment production is already defined in A.6.2 (slightly a different production) If we can not change the original proposal I will have to vote NO. ---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC91: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0590.> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0590. ---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC19-60: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0598.> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0598. ---- _X_Yes __No SV-BC69: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0610.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0610.html

-----Original Message----- From: Karen Pieper [mailto:Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 1:03 AM To: sv-bc@eda.org <mailto:sv-bc@eda.org> Subject: [sv-bc] Email voting on all open proposals closing 3/15/03

Hi All,

Here are all of the remaining proposals, which we have not been able to vote on in committee. Here is the process that we agreed on, during our last F2F meeting, Jan 22nd:

* Whoever does not vote, will be assumed as not objecting * If an eligible voting member votes against it, the topic will be brought up for a discussion In the last meeting, we agreed that an email discussion may take place over issues where there is a no vote and if the issue is resolved (potentially with a friendly amendment) a member may change their vote to yes.

The voting will close at 5pm PST next Saturday 3/15/03.

I have a couple of requests:

* Please submit your vote below, as YES or NO. If you vote NO, please come up w/ a counter proposal and/or modifications/reasons, and submit it by

Mar 15th * It would be useful to get all votes (to be used as a straw poll, if needed)

Thanks,

Karen

__Yes __No SV-BC39: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0514.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0514.html __Yes __No SV-BC81: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0518.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0518.html __Yes __No SV-BC78: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0530.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0530.html __Yes __No SV-BC80: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0534.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0534.html __Yes __No SV-BC81-1: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0535.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0535.html

__Yes __No SV-BC82: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0538.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0538.html __Yes __No SV-BC83: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0539.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0539.html __Yes __No SV-BC59: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0556.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0556.html __Yes __No SV-BC84: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0557.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0557.html __Yes __No SV-BC84-1: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0558.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0558.html

__Yes __No SV-BC75: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0569.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0569.html __Yes __No SV-BC26-2: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0576.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0576.html __Yes __No SV-BC42-11: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0579.html __Yes __No SV-BC21-1: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0580.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0580.html __Yes __No SV-BC91: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0590.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0590.html

__Yes __No SV-BC69: <http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0610.html> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/0610.html

Next message: Brad Pierce: "[sv-bc] Tasks with null statement (;) as body"
Previous message: David W. Smith: "[sv-bc] BNF Change tracking"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 13 2003 - 12:11:14 PST