SV-EC Meeting Minutes 21 April 2003 11:00 am. Monday Voting Members (3/4 or > 75%) (rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrxrxrrxrrrrrrr) (-----a----aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-a) Arturo Salz (Synopsys) (-----aa-aaaaaaaaa-a--aaaaaaa) Brad Pierce (Synopsys) (aaaaa-aaaa-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) David Smith (Synopsys) (---aaa-a-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) Francoise Martinolle (Cadence) (------------aaaaaaaa-aaaaaaa) Jay Lawrence (Cadence) (-------------------a-aaaaa-a) Jeff Freedman (ModelTech) (-------------------aaa-aaaaa) Michael Burns (Motorola) (aaaapaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-a) Mehdi Mohtashemi (Synopsys) (-aaaaaaaa-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) Neil Korpusik (Sun) (-aaaaaaa-aaaaaa-aaaa-aaaaaaa) Stefen Boyd (IEEE 1364) Non-Voting Members (attendance based) (----------------a------a----) Chris Spear (Synopsys) (a-aaaa-aaa-aaaa-a-aa---a-aa-) Cliff Cummings (IEEE 1364) (-aaa-a-aaaa---a-aaaa-aaaa--a) Dennis Brophy (ModelTech) (----------------a----a------) Dave Rich (Synopsys) (--------aa-a-a-aaa-a--a-a---) Stu Sutherland (IEEE 1364) Guests (non-voting) (--a-------------------------) Adam Krolnik (LSI Logic) (---a-a----------a-----------) Alec Stanculescu (Fintronic) (----------------a-----------) Alex Zamfirescu (ASC) (---------aa-a-aa-a-a--------) Don Mills (LCDM Engineering) (aa-aa-----------------------) Heath Chambers (HMC) (aaa-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-aaaaa) Kevin Cameron (National) (-----a-a-a-a----------------) Tim Corcoran (WHDL) Inactive Members (Missed last 4 meetings) (-aaa------------------------) Dave Kelf (Synopsys) (----------------a-----------) Jayant Nagda (Synopsys) (aaaaaaaaaaaa-------a--------) Karen Pieper (Synopsys) (---a-aa-----a---------------) Kurt Takara (0-in) (--a--a-a--------------------) Michael McNamara (Verisity) (aaa-------------------------) Paul Graham (Cadence) (aapaa----------ma----a------) Peter Flake (Synopsys) (a---------------------------) Roy Armoni (Intel) (aapa-a---------------a------) Simon Davidmann (IEEE) (aa---a----------------------) Steven Sharp (Cadence) (-----a----------------------) Stephen Meier (Synopsys) (-aaaaa--a-------------------) Tom Fitzpatrick (Synopsys) (-----a----------------------) Zeev Kirshenbaum (Verisity) r => Regular meeting x => Extra meeting (Presence counts for attendance, absence does not) a => Attended p => Attended by proxy - => Missed Action Items: [identified with AI (#) in this text, # refers to AI number] 1. Arturo: Create change for LRM-49 (Will be new LRM numbers in Draft 5 changes). 2. Arturo: Create change for LRM-55 (Will be new LRM numbers in Draft 5 changes). 3. Arturo: Add change for specifying default to be automatic for methods (Section 11.9?). Minutes 4/21/03 taken by Mehdi Mohtashemi 1. Approve the minutes of 14 April 2003 Motion to approve: Mike Burns Second: Brad Abstain: None Against: None Minutes approved 2. Review of LRM Issues. Both LRM5 and LRM4 issues A. Draft 4 Open issue: LRM-49: singular type... Does it need to be BNF consturct. Francoise: i could not find a definition for singular Arturo: section 3.14, describes it. editor's note, David: it is 3.15, page 24. Arturo: add the definition for singular, 3.14 could be this, and bump 15 and 16. David: add a new section before casting, Francoise: i would add it to 3.2 datatype syntax, strange to have it late in the chapter. it is in BNF. Arturo: it should not be in BNF, proposing to change it. It does not show up in, only 3.2 first item. David: does it show up anywhere else, Francoise: in 3.12, 3.11, it shows up, David: Part of data type, associate dimension, snippets do not matter, copied from annexA. definition of datatype, and in associtaive array definition. Arturo: singular does not need to be in BNF, it is confusing Francoise: it has a complete definition, it is good to have it in there. Arturo: it is a category of datatype, Francoise: it clarifies in BNF, that it explains what the singular type can be, then BNF definition of datatype should be modified. Stefen: arrays, and prtotypes of $cast that had singular, needing to specify it, Arturo: the only place it we use it is in $cast, since we do not have any rules for aggregate type. text had an error. Stefen: i am inclined to say it is good thing to have in BNF, Jay: BNF is syntax, not adding anything to syntax, set of things with having names, we could make such a category, if it is used over can be conveninent to have them in BNF. more of a definition of terms. David: no syntactic constructs with it, a semantics Francoise: BNF can have semantics content. David: it could add more confusion. Jay: if it is used multiple times, it makes it easier to have it Stefen: anyone else wanting it in BNF. Niel: where would it go in definition? Francoise: the singular name is used everywhere. Arturo: making a section it would be easier to find. David: we may have to take a vote on this one. Mike: if it is important enough to have it. Arturo: it is incorrect, it should contain packed arrays, it is non-trivial, split it away, it is easier to keep it with datatypes. Mike: if change has to be made, in favor of keeping it simple, writing in text. David: do we need to take a vote on this? to remove singular in BNF, and raise it to a section in 3. LRM issues where Stu has raised this to address. We need to respond to each one of LRM 4, and 5 drafts. Most of changes have come from reviews, editornotes responses, 3 items in draft 4 that got no response, 5 in draft5 require. in change of BNF, need to make sure there is no disagreement on it. What Arturo is proposing to do is ok then with everyone. AI #1 prepare the new section for singular definition B. Draft 4 Open issue: LRM-55: David: Stu says it is disallowed. Arturo: i think there is a small typo in BNF, it is allowed in David: if there is a change you need to make it clear proposal. AI #2: Arturo to send the change later. C. Draft 4 Open issue: LRM-216: David: there was a confirmation on this, i can close it. D. Chapter 11 responses to Francoise David: between today and tomorrow, members need to look at the responses on changes and send in their comments/issues so we can close them. David: there were three typos, top 3 on draft5 LRM changes. also on section 11, Arturo generated responses to Francoise comments, it would be good to review them. Jay: i was looking at document respones to Francoise questions, comment on tasks/functions inside class being automatic. David: the response was that methods were automatic. Arturo: everything is static by default, program, modules, but methods in class were automatic by default. David: you are going to add something on 11.9, AI #3 Arturo: incoprate the proper additions based on the above responses. David: There are a number of other changes that were in response to Francoise's issues. Any problems with them? (response indicated that there were not). D. Draft 5 changes David: The reflector contains a number of issues (based on Editor's notes) that must be addressed by the end of Tuesday. Arturo will be generating responses. If there are any items that you wish to make comment on please send comments today. The changes will all be posted by 5:00pm tommorrow (pacific time). 3. Next phases David: process going forward: email vote starting today, closing on Thursday at 5:00 pm. relating to the LRM SV-EC changes, it is a company vote. Vassillios has requested that all company participants vote, only company vote will be counted, for visibility. David: this could be the last meeting for 3.1LRM work, after this,unless there are some issues, that i have to call a meeting, editing from board review for example. Next step, 3.1A, planning is being talked about, nothing definite. We will start opening work on that when plans are firmed up. With that, thanking everyone's participation in this effort. 4. Meeting closed at 11:45 am