Re: [sv-ac] Some corrections/clarifications in SV3.1, draft 5

Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Some corrections/clarifications in SV3.1, draft 5
From: Surrendra Dudani (Surrendra.Dudani@synopsys.com)
Date: Tue Apr 22 2003 - 10:32:02 PDT

• Next message: Stephen Meier: "[sv-ac] Status of requirements wrt SV3.1-Draft5"
• Previous message: Adam Krolnik: "Re: [sv-ac] immediate assert"
• In reply to: Ambar Sarkar: "[sv-ac] Some corrections/clarifications in SV3.1, draft 5"
• Reply: Surrendra Dudani: "Re: [sv-ac] Some corrections/clarifications in SV3.1, draft 5"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

1. Section 17.2 Immediate asertions

The BNF, if I interpret it correctly, will allow nested asserts...that
is an assert statement within the pass/fail statement of an assertion.
Is this allowed?

2. Section 17.7.8 Conditions over sequences
The syntax is sequence_expr ::= ...|sequence_expr throughout
sequence_expr

Shouldn't the 1st sequence_expr on the RHS be a boolean expression? The
paragraph that follows this synatx block is also confusing. Minimally,
we should distinguish between the two by naming the first as
sequence_expr1 and the second as sequence_expr2.

Thanks.
-Ambar

--
Ambar Sarkar                       Email:
ambar.sarkar@paradigm-works.com
Principal Consulting Engineer      Phone: 978-824-1363
Paradigm Works                      Cell: 508-561-1868