[sv-ac] RE: Additional feedback on 3213

Hi Scott,

Thank you for your comments. I updated my proposal and will upload it shortly.

Please, see my comments below.

Thanks,
Dmitry

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Little Scott-B11206
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 15:26
To: 'sv-ac@eda-stds.org'
Subject: [sv-ac] Additional feedback on 3213

Hi Dmitry:

I apologize for being slow with this feedback.

In 16.5.1, you say "Here are formal definitions of a sampled value." I would prefer something like, "Below is the formal definition of sampled value."
[Korchemny, Dmitry] Done.

I believe logic and #1step should be bold.
[Korchemny, Dmitry] Made logic bold. #1step is typeset inconsistently in the LRM. I In most cases it is not bold. Therefore I leave it as it is. I opened new Mantis 3585 for this issue.

I would prefer to remove the paragraph "In the LRM several types of sampling...". I don't really believe that the term sampling is used inconsistently. I believe it is an issue with the term sampled value for which we now provide a formal definition. My problem is that we now define sampled value to mean the current value for certain variable types. That obviously isn't a sampled value by the intuitive definition of sampled value. Given this definition of sampled value, you are forced to talk about when you sample the sampled value. Although you have avoiding that phrase by saying thing like a sampled value is "taken" in the Postponed region or a function returns the sampled value from the Postponed region. I would prefer to see you define another term concurrent sampled value or something that doesn't have meaning elsewhere in the LRM. I have obviously been outvoted on that direction, so I will drop this objection.
[Korchemny, Dmitry] I removed the paragraph. I still think that the notion of sampling is not completely consistent in the LRM: we have sampling is assertions, in covergroups, etc. Their sampling is done in different regions, and the terminology becomes confusing. The term "sampled" should be applicable in our case. For example, we can say that the function $past samples its argument at the previous clock tick; if its argument is a design variable, it samples it in the Preponed region, in other cases it samples it in the Postponed region. It would be more accurate to say that there are different rules for sampling constituents of its expression. However, I would avoid such an explanation in the LRM in order not to repeat the definition of sampled value separately for sampled value functions.

Thanks,
Scott

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.