SVDB 965 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=965 SVDB 1004 ___Yes _X__No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1004 As Steven pointed out this description is only for the self-determined case. SVDB 1064 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1064 SVDB 1101 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1101 SVDB 1111 ___Yes _X__No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1111 I think this will cause a lot of backwards compatibility issues. Verilog-XL did not check this, and other tools have been forced to follow Verilog-XL. I think the standard should reflect what most tools actually have implemented. SVDB 1143 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1143 SVDB 1257 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1257 SVDB 1388 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1388 SVDB 1400 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1400 SVDB 1497 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1497 SVDB 1499 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1499 SVDB 1505 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1505 SVDB 1562 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1562 SVDB 1589 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1589 SVDB 1597 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1597 SVDB 1606 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1606 SVDB 1620 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1620 SVDB 1641 ___Yes _X__No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1641 Does this effect assertion reporting? Are assertion errors and user errors the same thing? SVDB 1644 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1644 SVDB 1660 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1660 SVDB 1666 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1666 SVDB 1746 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1746 SVDB 1748 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1748 SVDB 1749 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1749 SVDB 1762 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1762 SVDB 1783 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1783 SVDB 1788 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1788 SVDB 1807 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1807 SVDB 1821 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1821 SVDB 1825 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1825 SVDB 1831 _X__Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1831 SVDB 1850 ___Yes _X__No http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1850 I don't think deleting this is the correct solution. I think we need to define what variation means. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Sun Jun 10 19:28:24 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jun 10 2007 - 19:28:34 PDT