[sv-bc] Name resolution face-to-face meeting in San Jose

I am sending this directly to people who expressed interest in
attending the planned face-to-face regarding name resolution issues.

I've cc'd BC, EC, and AC in case there are others who would
like to attend on the given date.  If this poses a problem
and you feel that it is imperative that you attend, please
let me know immediately.  I, Mehdi, or Matt will send out email
once the location is finalized.  Please do let one of us know if
you plan to attend at all so that food/refreshment arrangements
can be made.

The current plan is to meet in San Jose on Monday, 9/24.
Either be Synopsys or Mentor will host; that should be known
later this week.  I suggest that we plan to start at 9:30 or 10am
and go through 4:00 pm.

My suggested agenda would be to proceed as follows:
   1) talk through details of existing proposal frameworks and
      see if we can get closer to consensus on direction
   2) deal with other basic differences between what Mark and I
      have suggested (not all of which are the key difference)
         -- role of imports during bind and/or other late resolution
         -- role of compilation units in the same
         -- issues related to forward references to class members
         -- resolution for out-of-range indices in generate loops and
            arrayed instances
   3) at least talk about other things that we haven't raised
      yet in the discussion
         -- modport name is one topic - how does that get pulled into
            the overall description
         -- having a more clear rule for how "forward" references to
            functions are actually resolved.
         -- rules regarding upwards referencing versus current
            hierarchical upwards rules.  In particular should the
            current rule requiring a "scope" be retained or relaxed
            to permit resolution into variable names that admit ".".
         -- should most/all of the resolution rules be pulled
            together from the various places in the LRM
         -- other topics may certainly be suggested here
   4) on topics for which consensus can be raised, agreements on
      who is going to make proposals and the scope of those proposals

I don't think that (3) is nearly exhaustive yet; I need to review
some of my notes on other issues.  Certainly other input is welcome.

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.