[sv-bc] RE: Config facts & Dangerous Precedent - was: potential command line option

Steven,

  Encouraging implementors to bring interpretation issues before a
standards group for clarification is hopeful, but there is often no
conflict until there is a second interpretation that is in conflict with
the first.

  Certainly, the LRMs have numerous instances of ambiguities, but the
first to interpret the ambiguity, in the absence of anything but the
LRM, seems sufficient.  What I notice is the problems of interpretation
come when the second or successive implementations come to market.  At
one point in time Si2 had played a role of arbitrator for interpretation
of gate-level Verilog implementations.  A group of ASIC vendors paid to
have a testing lab put in place that would take ASIC cells and run them
against an implementation (for a fee) comparing results to what the ASIC
vendors had expected to be the results.  (I would guess this was
probably something close to or equal to XL.)  I think this activity had
far greater impact and value than if these issues had been arbitrated in
the standards committee.  The point being that there may be other venues
to arbitrate conflict besides the standards group.

-Dennis 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-btf@boyd.com [mailto:owner-btf@boyd.com] On Behalf Of Steven
Sharp
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 1:02 PM
To: btf@boyd.com; etf@boyd.com; sv-bc@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org;
cliffc@sunburst-design.com
Subject: Re: Config facts & Dangerous Precedent - was: potential command
line option

Cliff wrote:
>Now we have to determine what constitutes a valid "attempt to get the 
>ambiguity clarified before implementing."

This part of my comment was less about the history of this issue, and
more trying to promote better practices in the future.

Despite our efforts, there will be ambiguities in the P1800 LRM.  If
everyone goes off and implements their own interpretation, then we won't
have a standard language.  We need to encourage implementors to bring
such things to the standards group for clarification before
implementing.

Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com