Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Email Vote 3 on proposed changes
From: Jay Lawrence (lawrence@cadence.com)
Date: Wed Feb 05 2003 - 13:11:55 PST
David,
Please find my votes below and a brief explanation of the reasons for a
'NO' vote. Many of these will be cleaned up after scheduling semantics
are ironed out.
__yes _ X _no 1. Approve CH-17
The persistent nature of events is still up for debate.
_ X _yes __no 2. Approve CH-18
_ X _yes __no 3. Approve CH-20
_ X _yes __no 4. Approve CH-47
_ X _yes __no 5. Approve CH-53
__yes _ X _no 6. Approve CH-60
Definition or existance of "Verification phase" is TBD.
_ X _yes __no 7. Approve CH-83
__yes _ X _no 8. Approve CH-84
Definition or existance of "Verification phase" is TBD.
_ X _yes __no 9. Approve CH-85
_ X _yes __no 10. Approve CH-86
__yes _ X _no 11. Approve CH-93
This entire section needs to be integrated with Events and event
control syntax
__yes _ X _no 12. Approve CH-94
Larger issue than I want to give a quick Yes over email vote
_ X _ yes __no 13. Approve CH-95
__yes _ X _no 14. Approve CH-96
Much clearer but,
Why aren't concatentations allowed?
This still doesn't say when the drive occurs at that cycle
(active event or NBA event)
Is there an NBA equivalent to this drive?
__yes _ X _no 15. Approve CH_97
I just don't understand this.
__yes _ X _no 16. Approve CH-98
Definition or existance of "Verification phase" is TBD.
__yes _ X _no 17. Approve CH-99
How does this differ from CH_97?
__yes _ X _no 18. Approve CH-100
I like "wait fork;" but not exiting simulation when programs are
done.
I like "disable fork;" but
'join any' should be 'join_any'
There is still a bunch of text here about
$terminate() does it belong?
__yes _ X _no 19. Approve CH_101
Definition or existance of "Verification phase" is TBD.
Jay
===================================
Jay Lawrence
Architect - Functional Verification
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
(978) 262-6294
lawrence@cadence.com
===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Feb 05 2003 - 13:13:05 PST