RE: [sv-ec](updated) Email Vote: Response requested by Wednesday May 11 2011 11:59pm

> (1) Mantis 3046 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=3046
> [Dotted names within inlined constraints]
> [proposal: 3046_inline_dotted_names.pdf]
>
> (2) Mantis 2506 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2506
> [Non-trivial coverage space shapes and joint conditions are difficult
> to specify with covergroups]
> [proposal: Proposal for Mantis 2506_v5.pdf]
>
> (3) Mantis 3531 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=3531
> [null should be allowed in constant expressions]
> [proposal file: 3531_null.pdf]
>
> (4) Mantis 3394 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=3394
> [invalid example for dynamic array]
> [proposal: 3394_illegal_example.pdf]
>
> (5) Mantis 2905 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2905
> [BNF bug for attribute instance along with timeunits_declaration]
> [proposal: 2905_attribute_timeunits.pdf]
>
> (6) Mantis 3254 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=3254
> [18.5.6 if-else constraints mistakenly uses the work "block" when it
> means "set"]
> [proposal: 3254_constraint_set.pdf]
>
> (7) Mantis 3298 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=3298
> [Use of 'this' in a coverpoint expression]
> [proposal: 3298_this_covergroup.pdf]

Friendly amendment: The new text should be in blue.

> (8) Mantis 3054 ___Yes _X__No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=3054
> CLOSE as duplicate of 3202 (sv-ac)
> [$countones and $onehot system functions in constraints]

Where is the proposal?

> (9) Mantis 2935 _X__Yes ___No
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2935
> CLOSE: already fixed in new version of the LRM and uploaded
> [Correction to example in 9.7. in 1800-2009]

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