RE: [sv-ec] RE: [sv-bc] P1800 draft2 review: Annex A

Mantis 1771

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
> On Behalf Of Brad Pierce
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 7:39 AM
> To: sv-bc@server.eda-stds.org
> Cc: sv-ec@server.eda-stds.org
> Subject: [sv-ec] RE: [sv-bc] P1800 draft2 review: Annex A
> 
> >Looking at this, I noted that blocking_assignment in A.6.2 and
> primary
> in A.8.4 have
> >
> >   [ implicit_class_handle . | class_scope | package_scope ]
> >
> >instead of
> >
> >   [ implicit_class_handle . | package_scope ].
> >
> >Is the omission of class_scope correct here?
> 
> Good question.  See also --
> 
>    http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ec/hm/3701.html
>    http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ec/hm/3795.html
> 
> -- Brad
> 
> [ Replying to http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-bc/hm/5781.html .]
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Bresticker, Shalom
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 8:29 PM
> To: Coffin, Eric; sv-bc@eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] P1800 draft2 review: Annex A
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > * Page 941. Change the title from "Formal syntax (1800-2005 Annex
> A)"
> > to
> > "Formal syntax (1800-2008 Annex A)".
> 
> [SB] The text in parentheses is noting the source of the text. The
> source is Annex A of 1800-2005, so it is correct.
> 
> 
> > * Page 975.  Change the first right hand side of the rule
> > 'variable_lvalue' in A.8.5 from:
> >
> > [ implicit_class_handle . [ package_scope ]
> > hierarchical_variable_identifier select
> >
> > to:
> >
> > [ implicit_class_handle . | package_scope ]
> > hierarchical_variable_identifier select
> >
> > This is just a change of '[' to '|' in the second l-bracket.
> 
> [SB] You are correct. Stu incorrectly changed it as part of Mantis
> 1495
> and SV-AC already spotted this.
> 
> Looking at this, I noted that
> blocking_assignment in A.6.2 and primary in A.8.4 have
> 
> [ implicit_class_handle . | class_scope | package_scope ]
> 
> instead of
> 
> [ implicit_class_handle . | package_scope ].
> 
> Is the omission of class_scope correct here?
> 
> Thanks,
> Shalom
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.