RE: [sv-ac] Wrong spelling of goto operator in BNF (App A.)

Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Wrong spelling of goto operator in BNF (App A.)
From: Bassam Tabbara (bassam@novas.com)
Date: Mon Apr 21 2003 - 16:31:52 PDT

Thx Surrendra, so no mixup then Thx... sorry (may be it's just that you
re-used some old names, with new syntax, is that it ?).

Here are details on the ones that seemed (and still do!) off:

1) How come we go in immediate assertions to "statement"
action_block ::=
statement _or_null
| [ statement ] else statement
// from Annex A.6.3

This is not like "if", Should have statement_or_null both places.

** You had a version with only else statement_or_null, I thought we were
going towards if not other way... That's what I meant by the ";"
business below.

** Also in the text there are still some quirks related to action block
and the ";" bit ... E.g.

env_prop: assert property (abc(rst,in1,in2)) pass_stat else fail_stat;

2) goto_repetition, this is the old name/syntax. We changed to -> for
event. And "operator" instead of repetition.... (thought this whole
chunk is old... Guess not ?).

goto_repetition ::= [*> const_or_range_expression ]

Should be:

event_repetition ::= [*-> const_or_range_expression ]

Thx.
-Bassam. 

--
Dr. Bassam Tabbara
Technical Manager, R&D
Novas Software, Inc.

http://www.novas.com
(408) 467-7893

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Surrendra Dudani
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 1:28 PM
> To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Wrong spelling of goto operator in BNF (App A.)
> 
> 
> Hi Bassam,
> 
> *> will be fixed to *->
> I'm not sure what you mean by immediate assert termination ';' ?
> 
> Surrendra
> At 10:40 AM 4/21/2003 -0700, Bassam Tabbara wrote:
> >Thx Adam. Actually my initial skim revealed a few things in 
> addition to 
> >the "*>" that "came back" in this rev.... (for example, unless I am 
> >mistaken, also the immediate assert ";" termination 
> discussion was set 
> >back ... Was the naming of "*..." operators set back to ?).
> >** I suspect it might be the case, that we forgot to update 
> the BNF in 
> >Appendix, and Stu took that back into the chapter.
> >
> >Faisal/Steve/Surrendra please take a look at this if I am right, 
> >otherwise please set me straight (I was a bit turned off by 
> these, and 
> >so became passive about reviewing agian) so we can update that in 
> >draft6.
> >
> >Thx.
> >-Bassam.
> >
> >
> >--
> >Dr. Bassam Tabbara
> >Technical Manager, R&D
> >Novas Software, Inc.
> >
> >http://www.novas.com
> >(408) 467-7893
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] 
> > > On Behalf Of Adam Krolnik
> > > Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 9:57 AM
> > > To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
> > > Subject: [sv-ac] Wrong spelling of goto operator in BNF (App A.)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Good morning all.
> > >
> > > Would someone concur of the wrong spelling of the goto 
> operator as 
> > > noted on pages 174 (Syntax box 17-5). This matches our agreements 
> > > and the text on page 174.
> > >
> > > Faisal, I recommend this change, provided there is agreement, to 
> > > David Smith.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Section A.2.10, pg 301.
> > >
> > > WAS:
> > >
> > > goto_repetition ::= [*> const_or_range_expression ]
> > >
> > > MUST BE:
> > >
> > > goto_repetition ::= [*-> const_or_range_expression ]
> > >
> > > Section 17.7.2 pg 174.
> > >
> > > WAS:
> > >
> > > goto_repetition ::= [*> const_or_range_expression ]
> > >
> > > MUST BE:
> > >
> > > goto_repetition ::= [*-> const_or_range_expression ]
> > >
> > >
> > >       Adam Krolnik
> > >       Verification Mgr.
> > >       LSI Logic Corp.
> > >       Plano TX. 75074
> > >
> > >
> > >
> 
> 
> 
> **********************************************
> Surrendra A. Dudani
> Synopsys, Inc.
> 377 Simarano Drive, Suite 300
> Marlboro, MA 01752
> 
> Tel:   508-263-8072
> Fax:   508-263-8123
> email: Surrendra.Dudani@synopsys.com
> **********************************************
>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Apr 21 2003 - 16:34:00 PDT