[sv-bc] Re: [sv-ec] RE: [sv-cc] Notes from 26 February 2010 SystemVerilog Requirements Gathering Meeting

Gran, Alex wrote:
[...]

> "General Directions & Vision"
> I think Gordon Vreugdenhil (Mentor) first brought this up if I
> remember correctly. Trying to sum this discussion up into a single
> sentence; There are people working on 1800 that are focused on 3
> somewhat separate topics: design aspects, verification aspects,
> assertion aspects of the language. Often times these 3 parties have
> different visions of where they see the language going. There was some
> discussion about trying to form a higher level Direction and Vision to
> help keep the 3 main parties going the saw way

Alex's summary is correct but just to elaborate on that a bit further,
I am concerned that some requested feature enhancements are going
to have substantial issues in terms of scaling to very large systems
and may have problems in terms of being consistent with other aspects
of SV. If we, as a general community, don't work on setting some sort
of overall "trajectory" for SV by which we can shape the directions
for specific requests, SV will become a grab-bag of features and
any semantic consistency will be lost. We are already struggling
with that as evidenced by user complaints about inconsistent rules
and overall complexity. Having a more consistent overall model is,
I believe, critical for long-term stability. There really is no
group even attempting to do that kind of "study" or "long-term
planning" right now and I think we need to take a serious look at
whether we can get such a group together. There are definite
problems along numerous fronts that could block such an attempt,
but I think we need to try.

Gord.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Vreugdenhil                                503-685-0808
Model Technology (Mentor Graphics)                gordonv@model.com
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.