Re: FSM Section Vote?


Subject: Re: FSM Section Vote?
From: Michael McNamara (mac@verisity.com)
Date: Wed Apr 03 2002 - 13:02:17 PST


At 05:34 PM 4/2/02 -0800, Stuart Sutherland wrote:

>Yes, I did second the proposal, but I'd like to suggest a friendly
>amendment to the wording Cliff put in writing.
>
>AMENDED PROPOSAL: Remove the State Machine Section (section 9 in draft 4)
>from the SystemVerilog 3.0 LRM, and defer transition statement and
>operators for consideration in SystemVerilog 3.1.

I vote yes as amended

>Assuming Cliff's proposal passes, I would also like to make a related
>proposal for e-mail vote (this will need a second).
>PROPOSED: Remove "state" from the list of keywords in Annex B. Leave
>"transition" in Annex B as a reserved word.

I vote yes.

>Stu

-mac



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 13:03:20 PST