Re: [sv-ac] Call to vote: Due September 19 (resend with inserted semicolons)

Dmitry,
This is better, but I still have a minor issue with this sentence:

The checker instantiation should be treated as if there were continuous
assignments, executed in the Reactive region, of the checker’s output formal
arguments to its corresponding actual arguments.

I understand it now, but I had to reread it twice because the qualifier
"executed in the Reactive region" gets in the way of the other 2
relationships "of the checker's..." ..."to its...". Also, shouldn't the
"its" be "their"?
Would you consider this change (It's OK if you don't want to):
The checker instantiation should be treated as if there were continuous
assignments of the checker’s output formal arguments to its *their
*corresponding
actual arguments. Those continuous assignments are executed in the Reactive
region.
Ben

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 3:10 AM, Korchemny, Dmitry <
dmitry.korchemny@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Ben,****
>
> ** **
>
> I uploaded a new version
> http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=5447&type=bug,
> taking into account your comments and Tom’s suggestion.****
>
> See my specific comments below.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Dmitry****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* ben cohen [mailto:hdlcohen@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 17, 2011 22:16
> *To:* thomas.thatcher@oracle.com
> *Cc:* Korchemny, Dmitry; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> *Subject:* Re: [sv-ac] Call to vote: Due September 19****
>
> ** **
>
> I need some clarification on this: ****
>
> "Checker actual output arguments shall be variable_lvalue or net_lvalue."*
> ***
>
> So the actual can be a wire with a resolution function, correct? ****
>
> *[Korchemny, Dmitry] Correct.*****
>
> ** **
>
> The checker instantiation should be treated as if there were a continuous
> assignment executed in the Reactive region, of the checker formal argument
> to the corresponding actual argument."****
>
> The construction of this sentence is odd to me. I don't understand this
> "of the checker formal argument to ..." following the comma. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Are we saying? ****
>
> The checker instantiation should be treated as if there were a continuous
> assignment executed in the Reactive region, and that assignment originates
> from the checker formal argument to the corresponding actual argument.****
>
> ** **
>
> *[Korchemny, Dmitry] Rewrote it as follows:*
>
> The checker instantiation should be treated as if there were continuous
> assignments, executed in the Reactive region, of the checker’s output formal
> arguments to its corresponding actual arguments.****
>
> ** **
>
> *Please fix error in code*****
>
> From ****
>
> checker mutex (logic sig, event clock, output bit failure);****
>
> assert property ($onehot0(sig) failure = 1’b0 else failure = 1’b1;****
>
> endchecker : mutex****
>
> ** **
>
> to****
>
> checker mutex (logic sig, event clock, output bit failure);****
>
> assert property(@ (posedge clk) $onehot0(sig)) failure=1'b0; else
> failure=1'b1;****
>
> endchecker : mutex****
>
> [Ben] *The model does not have a default clock, so the assertion needs a
> clock. The assertion needs a closing ")" and the pass action block needs a
> ";"*****
>
> ** **
>
> *[Korchemny, Dmitry] *Done as follows:****
>
> *assert property* (@clock $onehot0(sig)) failure = 1’b0; *else * failure =
> 1’b1;****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Thomas J Thatcher <
> thomas.thatcher@oracle.com> wrote:****
>
> My Vote
>
> On 09/14/11 11:18, Korchemny, Dmitry wrote:****
>
>
> Mantis 2093 __x__ Yes ____ No****
>
>
> In 17.2:
>
> I'm going to suggest, "In a similar manner to sequences and properties, . .
> . " for this sentence.
>
> (Note that "Similar to sequences and properties" is not correct, because
> this phrase functions as an adverb, describing the action "may specify")
>
>
> Tom****
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.****
>
> ** **
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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* <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.