RE: Problem with the named constraints example on page 178 of the latest draft

Hello Darren et. al.,
          I vote to APPROVE this draft provided the successful resolution of issues 0003200<http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=3200> and 0003199<http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=3199>
Thanks

[cid:image002.gif@01CB50CB.535B59F0]

Brett Lammers | Senior Technical Leader, Solutions Deployment Group

P: 303.579.6721 www.cadence.com<http://www.cadence.com>

From: darren.galpin@infineon.com [mailto:darren.galpin@infineon.com]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 9:29 AM
To: Brett Lammers
Cc: Yaron Kashai; ieee1647@eda.org
Subject: RE: Problem with the named constraints example on page 178 of the latest draft

Hi Brett,

You can vote to approve providing the issue is fixed..... I've assigned the issue to Amy for revision, so hopefully we'll have a new version by Monday.

Cheers,

Darren

________________________________
From: owner-ieee1647@eda.org [mailto:owner-ieee1647@eda.org] On Behalf Of Brett Lammers
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 4:24 PM
To: Galpin Darren (IFGB ATV MCD CV)
Cc: Yaron Kashai; ieee1647@eda.org
Subject: RE: Problem with the named constraints example on page 178 of the latest draft
Hello Darren,
          I wasn't sure how to handle my vote given this issue. In general I approve this draft provided we fix this issue but it did not seem to be correct to vote approved with this issue outstanding. What do you think?

thanks

[cid:image002.gif@01CB50CB.535B59F0]

Brett Lammers | Senior Technical Leader, Solutions Deployment Group

P: 303.579.6721 www.cadence.com<http://www.cadence.com>

From: darren.galpin@infineon.com [mailto:darren.galpin@infineon.com]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 1:28 AM
To: Brett Lammers
Cc: Yaron Kashai; ieee1647@eda.org
Subject: RE: Problem with the named constraints example on page 178 of the latest draft

PS. Making data_size undefined with no else error() is consistent then with the example in the next section 10.4.1.1.

________________________________
From: Brett Lammers [mailto:brettl@cadence.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 5:26 PM
To: Galpin Darren (IFGB ATV MCD CV)
Cc: Yaron Kashai
Subject: Problem with the named constraints example on page 178 of the latest draft
Hello Darren,
                I apologize for the last minute issue but I have been crazy busy and have had to put off my review of the draft until today.

Anyway in my review I was spot checking a few examples listed in the Draft in Specman and ran into some issues with the example mentioned (page 178 "Syntax example (named constraint):")

One issue was just a simple typo (unit=>uint) which I submitted mantis issue 3199
 The other issue I was not as sure whether it was a Specman issue or a Spec issue so I conferred with Yaron and some others in Cadence and Yaron's response was the following:
------------------------------------------------------ From Yaron -----------------------------------------------

Thanks Brett!

This seems broken to me. The example does not adhere to the LRM spec - meaning the LRM is inconsistent, regardless of Specman. In particular:

> keep data_size is undefined else error(...)

should match the syntax:

keep NAME is BOOL-EXP else error(...)

and "undefined" is not a BOOL-EXP.

I think there is no choice but to "stop the press". Let's start by notifying Darren. Someone on the R&D side should investigate the origin of this example and the intention behind it...

As such I will submit another issue...should I do anything else?

[cid:image002.gif@01CB50CB.535B59F0]

Brett Lammers | Senior Technical Leader, Solutions Deployment Group

P: 303.579.6721 www.cadence.com<http://www.cadence.com>

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
believed to be clean.
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.