I vote NO on 2081 and 2102 for same reasons as others. I vote YES on 2097 with suggested friendly amendments. I vote YES on all others. Details below. SVDB 909 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=909 SVDB 1265 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1265 SVDB 1278 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1278 SVDB 1360 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1360 SVDB 1487 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1487 SVDB 1489 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1489 SVDB 1573 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1573 SVDB 1610 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1610 SVDB 1645 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1645 SVDB 1750 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1750 SVDB 1993 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1993 SVDB 2006 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2006 SVDB 2029 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2029 SVDB 2081 ___Yes _x_No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2081 Same objections as others. SVDB 2092 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2092 SVDB 2097 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2097 Friendly amendments (words between **'s are struck out in the proposal): In the sentence in 10.6.1, "The assign procedural continuous assignment statement shall override all procedural assignments **or continuous assignment to a variable**," leave the words "to a variable". In the sentence in 10.6.1, "It shall not **be an unpacked array reference or** a bit-select or a part-select of a variable," leave the word "be". In 10.6.2, "The left-hand side of the assignment can be a reference to singular variable," add the word "a" before "singular". "a constant part-select of a vector net": I understand that the word "constant' was added to exclude indexed part-selects with a variable base_expr, but indexed part-selects with a constant base_addr should be allowed. I assume that was the intent. However, the term 'constant part-select' is defined in 11.5.1 to mean the [n:m] form and excludes the indexed part-select form. It would be desirable to reword to avoid this confusion. Question: Is it legal to do a force to a concatenation of a combination of nets and variables? SVDB 2102 ___Yes _x_No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2102 I too am uneasy about the change from 'bit' to 'element'. SVDB 2140 _x_Yes ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2140 Shalom --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Oct 29 07:09:50 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 29 2007 - 07:10:23 PDT