On 2720, I strongly disagree with the proposed resolution in the mantis item. This is related to the 2663 Mantis item on hierarchical names in compilation units. We should either deal with 2663 and then close 2720 by appealing to that solution or we should effectively embed the 2663 consensus as the interpretation of instance names for 2720 (i.e. that any bind instance name is a top-down hierarchical name in the design). Gord. Gordon Vreugdenhil wrote: > I have uploaded a proposal for 2677 to allow multiple > forward type declarations and to allow forward type > declarations before and after the type definition. > > Gord. > > Brad Pierce wrote: >> SV-BC Ballot Comment Resolution Meeting >> Date: Monday, June 01, 2009 >> Time: 9:00am-11:00am PDT >> >> Toll Free Dial In Number in North America: 1-888-813-5316 >> Caller Paid Dial In Number: 1-650-584-6338 >> Meeting ID: 7839818 >> >> Agenda >> >> + Review IEEE patent policy >> http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt >> >> + Review Previous Meeting Minutes >> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/minutes/sv-bc_09_05_11.txt >> >> + 2380 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2380) >> Transferred to SV-EC, still time to give them your input. >> http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-bc/hm/9558.html >> >> + 2593 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2593) >> Proposal rejected by Champions; resolve with boilerplate? >> >> + 2678 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2668) >> Has tentative proposal, but not a consensus yet. >> >> + 2721 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2721) >> Has tentative proposal, but not a consensus yet. >> >> + 2677 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2667) >> Anyone care to write a proposal? (See bug notes for additional info) >> >> + 2690 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2690) >> Appears to be resolved by Mantis 1492 >> http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=1492 >> >> + 2663 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2663) >> Appears to be addressed by response to reflector >> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/9383.html >> >> + 2664 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2664) >> Appears to be addressed by response to reflector >> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/9384.html >> >> + 2665 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2665) >> Appears to be addressed by response to reflector >> http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/9385.html >> >> + 2666 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2666) >> Anyone care to write a proposal based on proposal in description? >> >> + 2667 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2667) >> Anyone care to write a proposal based on proposal in description? >> >> + 2668 (http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2668) >> Anyone care to write a proposal based on proposal in description? >> >> + 2669 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2669) >> Can it be addressed by >> 1) Stating the desired comment about file ordering is addressed in >> 3.14.2.2 >> 2) Deprecation either will not be done or will only be considered for >> future revision >> >> + 2697 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2697) >> Consider denying altogether or for at least this round. What about >> suggesting alternate means for getting the parameter values, e.g.: >> $bits of variables declared with those parameters >> >> + 2720 (http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2720) >> Anyone care to write a proposal? (See bug notes for additional info) >> > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.Received on Fri May 29 10:28:51 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 29 2009 - 10:30:03 PDT