Re: [sv-ac] SV-AC: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes

I filed http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=4002
Shalom, what is the process to have all the committees review their
sections for such errors.
It would be best have a professional IEEE document with good grammar.

 Summary0004002: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes for AL OF LRM
DescriptionThe LRM has several grammatical errors, with the most striking
one being the misuse of the pronouns "which" and "that" Attached is mantis
for recommended editing changes for sections 16 and 17.

*However, ALL of the LRM needs to be reviewed,
and each responsible committee should review their sections for proper
grammar.*
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Bresticker, Shalom <
shalom.bresticker@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi,****
>
> ** **
>
> I disagree with only one change. On page 422, the use of "would" clarifies
> that the assignment mentioned does not actually exist, so I would word it
> as ****
>
> ** **
>
> "The value assigned to w is the same as would result from the declaration
> assignment w = a || b."****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> Shalom****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] *On Behalf Of *ben
> cohen
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 03, 2012 9:47 PM
>
> *To:* sv-ac@eda-stds.org; Korchemny, Dmitry
> *Cc:* stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> *Subject:* [sv-ac] SV-AC: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes****
>
> ** **
>
>
> Below is a list of editing on the misuse of "which" for "that" or for the
> omission of the "which" ****
>
> I looked into sections 16 and 17. If you disagree with me and find a
> better correction, let's do that. ****
>
> It is very important that this document be grammatically correct, as much
> as possible. The misuse of "which" for "that" pronoun is very common.
> Let's do the right thing at this go around.****
>
> Stuart, since these are English editing, you need to check the other
> sections. ****
>
> Ben ****
>
> *1800’D4 page 40: *****
>
> The syntax does not completely define the semantics of such qualified
> terms; for example****
>
> while an identifier which *that *would qualify semantically as an
> array_identifier is created by a declaration, such declaration forms are
> not explicitly described using array_identifier in the syntax.****
>
> *16.4 Deferred assertions, page 375*****
>
> The requirement of a single subroutine call implies that no begin-end
> block shall surround the pass or fail statements, as begin is itself a
> statement which *that *is not a subroutine call.****
>
> *16.4.5 Deferred assertions and multiple processes, page 385*****
>
> Some types of access may require creating a copy of the entire data
> structure which could****
>
> incur a significant performance penalty.****
>
> Some types of access may require creating a copy of the entire data *structure,
> which *could****
>
> incur a significant performance penalty.****
>
> *Page 389*****
>
> constant_primary includes constant_expression which is computed at compile
> time and shall result in an integer value.****
>
> constant_primary includes constant_expression *which is *computed at
> compile time and shall result in an integer value.****
>
> *Page 422*****
>
> the assignment of a to v is performed first and the assignment of v || b
> to w is performed second. The value assigned to w is the same as that which
> would result from the declaration assignment w = a || b.****
>
> the assignment of a to v is performed *first, *and the assignment of v ||
> b to w is performed second. The value assigned to w is the same as that
> which would the result from the declaration assignment w = a || b.****
>
> *Page 503*****
>
> A final procedure within a checker may include any construct which is
> allowed in a non-checker final procedure.****
>
> A final procedure within a checker may include any construct *which is* allowed
> in a non-checker final procedure.****
>
>
> Google Docs makes it easy to create, store and share online documents,
> spreadsheets and presentations. ****
>
> [image: Logo for Google Docs] <https://docs.google.com>****
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, 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, and is
believed to be clean.