Subject: RE: [sv-ac] FW: ASWG Final Status
From: Faisal Haque (fhaque@cisco.com)
Date: Fri Mar 21 2003 - 15:37:59 PST
Folks I am going to invite some of the people who were involved in this
process to the next AC meeting.
Which BTW I would like to move to 8-9:30 PST instead of 9:30.
-Faisal
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Krolnik [mailto:krolnik@lsil.com]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 3:31 PM
To: Faisal Haque
Cc: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ac] FW: ASWG Final Status
Hi All;
An interesting read indeed.
Item 1 ## - Sigh
Items 7 and 11, sequential implication and suffix implication are
ambiguously
named. Is one of these the overlapping implication and one a
nonoverlapping
implication? Or is one boolean and the other sequence?
What is the syntax of the nonoverlapping and overlapping versions?
Item 18 lists a new operation defined for next_event -- $first_occur
Do we need two ways to express this?
$first_occur( sequence)
sequence [*= 1]
Item 21 and 22 So I guess the sequence just sits inside this block
sequence s()
(a; b; c; d; e; f; g);
endsequence
Hmmm, a little heavy...
Item 23 - Immediate assertion is not ambiguous with concurrent
assertion.
How does this work? How do I know if I say assert (b|c) if its
immediate or
gets the default clock?
Item 24 - There is no discussion about always/initial and where they
occur in
a declarative vs. procedural assertion.
Item 25 - There must be some missing text, it says "See below" but there
is nothing
more. I presume there is a paragraph or two about templates.
Thanks for the work on this!
Adam Krolnik
Verification Mgr.
LSI Logic Corp.
Plano TX. 75074
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Mar 21 2003 - 15:38:59 PST