[sv-ac] RE: Feedback request

From: John Havlicek <johnh@cadence.com>
Date: Mon Dec 01 2014 - 05:56:54 PST
Hi All:

My feedback is late, but I'm sending it anyway.  Feedback on the original list is inlined below.

5070: Support sequence/property open arguments
[JH: Important, but I would not work on it now.  This should be done in coordination with SV-BC and SV-EC.  The need for function/method arguments is not limited to assertions.]

5071: Support assertion match instance reflection API.
[JH: Nice to have.]

J.H.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Korchemny, Dmitry
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 5:47 AM
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] Feedback request

Hi,

 

You are requested to send your feedback on working on the following Mantis items in the next P1800 PAR by 1-Dec-2014, UTC:

 

*        3478: Make drivers of inout ports accessible

[JH: No opinion.  I don't yet understand this.]

*        5063: Automatic inference of assertion statement type

[JH: Important.  Not earth shattering in impact, but definitely untidy as it stands.  I think this is something we can work on independently of other committees and within the scope of a "quiet PAR".]

*        5064: Create standard package to define constants used in assertion-related stuff

[JH: Nice to have.  I don't understand the motivating examples.  Mantis 5064 is pretty terse.]

*        5065: Create standard package to define implementation for commonly used properties

[JH: Important.  Limit new definitions to use existing language features.  Should be useful and consistent with a "quiet PAR".]

*        5067: Allow variables in delays and repeat operators

[JH: Important.  Should be useful and feasible in a "quiet PAR".  I like Mirek's suggestion about using const' syntax.]

*        5068: concurrent assertions in classes

[JH: Important, but not feasible.  I think this will not be possible in a "quiet PAR".  I think the right thing to do is to begin discussing the goals and challenges with participation across the P1800 committees.  I think the enhancement will not fare well without getting consensus and help from SV-BC and SV-EC.  Maybe P1800 could create a subgroup to study the problem and bring back recommendations?]

Your feedback should include one of the following marks for each item:

*        Important

*        Nice to have

*        Not important

*        No opinion

along with any free text comments.

 

You may also suggest additional enhancements not listed above, but they need to be filed as Mantis items first.

There is no need to discuss any errata or clarification items.

 

Thanks,

Dmitry

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Received on Mon Dec 1 05:57:14 2014

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Dec 01 2014 - 05:57:18 PST