[sv-bc] RE: E-mail Ballot: Respond by Sun Sep 16 8am PDT

From: Alsop, Thomas R <thomas.r.alsop_at_.....>
Date: Mon Sep 10 2007 - 22:51:51 PDT
Matt,

Yes on everything but 1473.  See comments below. Thanks, -Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Maidment, Matthew R 
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 12:49 PM
To: Bresticker, Shalom; 'Brad Pierce'; 'Cummings, Cliff'; 'Surrendra
Dudani'; 'Mark Hartoog'; 'Francoise Martinolle'; 'Karen Pieper'; 'Rich,
Dave'; 'Steven Sharp'; 'Vreugdenhil, Gordon';
'stuart@sutherland-hdl.com'; 'Gran, Alex'; 'Don Mills'; 'Heath
Chambers'; Alsop, Thomas R; 'Warmke, Doug'; 'Logie Ramachandran'; Will
Cummings
Cc: 'sv-bc@eda-stds.org'
Subject: E-mail Ballot: Respond by Sun Sep 16 8am PDT

-You have until 8am PDT, Sunday, September 16, 2007 to respond
-An issue passes if there are zero NO votes and half of the eligible
 voters respond with a YES vote.
-If you vote NO on any issue, your vote must be accompanied by a reason.
 The issue will then be up for discussion during a future conference
call.
-Note: For some issues, the proposed action is captured in the bug note
       (resolve as duplicate, already addressed, etc.). 

As of the September 6, 2007 meeting, the eligible voters are:

Brad Pierce        
Shalom Bresticker  
Cliff Cummings     
Surrendra Dudani   
Mark Hartoog        
Francoise Martinolle
Karen Pieper       
Dave Rich          
Steven Sharp       
Gordon Vreugdenhil 
Stu Sutherland 
Alex Gran
Don Mills
Heath Chambers
Will Cummings
Tom Alsop

SVDB  933 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=933

SVDB 1175 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1175

SVDB 1302 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1302

SVDB 1354 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1354

SVDB 1417 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1417

SVDB 1438 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1438

SVDB 1468 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1468

SVDB 1473 ___Yes   _X_No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1468
talsop - I don't see any difference in the new comments from the comment
that the always_latch "executes identically" to the always_latch.  In
the always_comb clause is states "The variables written on the left-hand
side of assignments shall not be written to by any other process." And
yet we are adding this _and_ including the statement "from the contents
of all called function".  Isn't this true for always_comb too?  From the
emails threads this appears to be legacy comments.  I think "executes
identically" is good enough.

SVDB 1554 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1554

SVDB 1767 _X_Yes   ___No  
http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1767

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Mon Sep 10 22:54:34 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Sep 10 2007 - 22:54:44 PDT