Subject: RE: FSM Section Vote
From: Dave Kelf (davek@co-design.com)
Date: Fri Apr 05 2002 - 05:45:45 PST
Thanks Dennis - no there is no vote on the second proposal
At 04:48 PM 4/4/2002 -0800, Dennis Brophy wrote:
>The proposal right now is, as Stu wrote it:
>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.
>
>VOTE: NO
>
>On Stu's second proposal to remove the state keyword, as we did not decide
>to do an email vote on this in the meeting although it came up, and as it
>was only briefly discussed at the end of the meeting when some people had
>left, I would like to NOT have an email vote on this now, but to leave it
>to a vote during the next meeting. I think that there are folks who would
>like to make some points on this before a vote is taken.
>
>VOTE: OK, there's no vote on this, right?
______________________________
Dave Kelf
VP Marketing
Co-Design Automation, Inc.
Tel: 1 877 6 CODESIGN ext 404
Mobile: 1 617 571 9883
Fax: 1 781 662 2281
Email: davek@co-design.com
Web: www.co-design.com
www.superlog.org
Latest News:
http://www.co-design.com/news/index.htm
"Faster, Smarter Verilog"
______________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Apr 05 2002 - 07:37:30 PST