RE: [sv-ac] 928 Proposal Updated

Hi Ed,

If I understand correctly, the proposal is to change the definition of
event expression to 

 event_expression ::=

[ edge_identifier ] expression [ iff expression ]

| sequence_instance [ iff expression ]

| event_expression or event_expression

| event_expression , event_expression

| ( event_expression, event_expression )

Note:  parentheses are required when an event expression that contains
comma-separated event expressions is passed as an actual argument using
positional binding.

I agree with this and also agree that we need to consult with other
groups. Is that something that you do or I need to do?

Lisa

 

 

________________________________

From: Eduard Cerny [mailto:Eduard.Cerny@synopsys.com] 
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 10:16 AM
To: Lisa Piper; Brad Pierce
Cc: Eduard Cerny; sv-ac@verilog.org
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] 928 Proposal Updated 

 

Hi Lisa et al,

 

the proposal seems fine now, but the question is whether the definition
of event_expression should be changed to include parentheses and a note
added to require parentheses when , separation of events is used, as
discussed on email. I suppose that if we do this change to
event_expression we should consult with other grouups, SV-BC, CC?

What's your opinion?

 

Best regards,

ed

 

	 

	
________________________________


	From: Lisa Piper [mailto:piper@cadence.com] 
	Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:55 PM
	To: Brad Pierce
	Cc: Eduard Cerny; sv-ac@verilog.org
	Subject: RE: [sv-ac] 928 Proposal Updated 

	Thanks Brad - you have a good eye!  I have incorporated the
changes in the attached and will update Mantis.

	 

	lisa

	 

	
________________________________


	From: Brad Pierce [mailto:Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com] 
	Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 12:00 PM
	To: Lisa Piper
	Cc: Eduard Cerny
	Subject: RE: [sv-ac] 928 Proposal Updated 

	 

	Lisa,

	 

	I think property_port_item and sequence_port_item each have an
extra semicolon at the end that should be deleted.

	 

	Also, I would recommend defining property_actual_arg as

	 

	    property_actual_arg ::=  property_instance |
sequence_actual_arg

	 

	-- Brad

	 

	
________________________________


	From: owner-sv-ac@eda-stds.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda-stds.org]
On Behalf Of Lisa Piper
	Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 1:52 PM
	To: sv-ac@verilog.org
	Subject: [sv-ac] 928 Proposal Updated 

	 

	Hi all,

	 

	928 is ready for review again.  I have reviewed and incorporated
comments from John Pierce, Bassom Tabbara, John Havlicek's, Miller
Hillel,  and Ed Cerny.  The summary is as follows:

	 

	The purpose is to fix issues with the existing BNF.
Specifically:

	 

	1. removal of list_of_formals, formal_list_item, and
actual_arg_expr that were not referenced

	 

	2. list_of_arguments was redfined as sequence_list_of_arguments
and property_list_of_arguments. actual_arg was defined as
sequence_actual_arg and property_actual arg.   They should be unique
because sequences cannot have property arguments.

	 

	3. tf_port list was replaced by sequence_port_list and
property_port_list to fix the issue that tf_port_list does not allow
default values assignment other than expression.  The new definition
allows for intiialization of all args in the definition. Named or
positional association of arguments is allowed when the sequence or
property is instantiated.  

	 

	4. Actual args for a sequence include sequence_instance or
event_expression (which includes expressions) Actual args for a property
are the same as for a sequence with the addition of a property_instance.

	 

	Lisa