RE: [sv-cc] RE: [sv-bc] Stu's QUESTIONS and NOTES in Draft 4

As far as I'm concerned, it's close enough.  The use of
the VPI-based canonical value (whatever that means) came
in with 1800-2005.  You can argue with the sentence on
other grounds, and if someone wants to tweak it, I wouldn't
object to adding the proposal to the queue.  But I think
we have more important issues to consider.
 
Regards,
Jim
 

---------------------------------------------------------
James H. Vellenga                            978-262-6381
Software Architect                              (FAX) 978-262-6636
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.         vellenga@cadence.com
270 Billerica Rd
Chelmsford, MA 01824-4179
"We all work with partial information."
---------------------------------------------------------- 

 


________________________________

	From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On Behalf
Of Bresticker, Shalom
	Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 3:28 PM
	To: Warmke, Doug; sv-bc@eda.org
	Cc: SV-CC
	Subject: RE: [sv-cc] RE: [sv-bc] Stu's QUESTIONS and NOTES in
Draft 4
	
	
	But is it proper to call 1800-2005 "the VPI-based canonical
value"?
	 
	Shalom


________________________________

		From: owner-sv-cc@server.eda.org
[mailto:owner-sv-cc@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Warmke, Doug
		Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 9:25 PM
		To: Bresticker, Shalom; sv-bc@server.eda.org
		Cc: SV-CC
		Subject: [sv-cc] RE: [sv-bc] Stu's QUESTIONS and NOTES
in Draft 4
		
		

		I thought about that, but I think it's OK the way it is.

		It is just an example.  If someone cares about it
enough,

		I'm sure no one would object to a Mantis and proposal.

		 

		Thanks,

		Doug

		 

		From: Bresticker, Shalom
[mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com] 
		Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 12:21 PM
		To: Warmke, Doug; sv-bc@server.eda.org
		Cc: SV-CC
		Subject: RE: [sv-bc] Stu's QUESTIONS and NOTES in Draft
4

		 

		It sounds like the following text should change as well:

		The svDpiVersion() function returns a string indicating
which DPI standard is supported by the simulator

		and in particular which canonical value representation
is being provided. For example, a tool that is based on

		IEEE Std 1800-2005, i.e., the VPI-based canonical value,
must return the string "1800-2005"

		Shalom

		 

			I.9.1.3  I think we should change the comment to
read as follows:

			/*

			 * Returns one of the following version strings:

			 * "1800-2008"

			 * "1800-2005"

			 * "SV3.1a"

			 */

			const char* svDpiVersion();

			 

			I filed Mantis 2101 and uploaded a proposal for
this one.

			SV-CC should add this to their list of items at
the next meeting.

			(It's trivial)

			 

	
---------------------------------------------------------------------
		Intel Israel (74) Limited
		 
		This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential
material for
		the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or
distribution
		by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the
intended
		recipient, please contact the sender and delete all
copies.

		-- 
		This message has been scanned for viruses and 
		dangerous content by MailScanner
<http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is 
		believed to be clean. 

	
---------------------------------------------------------------------
	Intel Israel (74) Limited
	
	This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential
material for
	the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or
distribution
	by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
	recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
	

	-- 
	This message has been scanned for viruses and 
	dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/>
, and is 
	believed to be clean. 


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