RE: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot due Monday, Feb 18, 8AM PST

You took the references out, but they returned in this text:

"The mechanics of handling zero-delay glitches are similar to those used
when processing deferred assertions (See 16.4).  In particular, a
unique, unique0, or priority violation check is evaluated at the time
the statement is executed, but violation reporting is deferred until the
Observed region of the current time step (See 16.4.1 and 16.4.2).

Once a violation is detected, a pending violation report is scheduled in
the Observed region of the current time step. It is scheduled on a
violation report queue associated with the currently executing process.
A violation report flush point is said to be reached if any of the
conditions in 16.4.2 are met." 

Shalom


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alsop, Thomas R 
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 9:17 PM
> To: Bresticker, Shalom; Maidment, Matthew R; sv-bc@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot due Monday, Feb 18, 8AM PST
> 
> Shalom, I take issue with the dependency on 2005.  Why do we 
> need to state that 2008 is dependant on 2005?  We made a lot 
> of effort to break this out from 2005 and make it stand independently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.