RE: [sv-ac] Proposal for 1392 - Mantis is ready

All,

I have added a word document that highlights the changes required for
mantis 1392. 

This is the formal proposal to vote on. 

Could you please vote on 1392?

Many Thanks 
Hillel


-----Original Message-----
From: Eduard Cerny [mailto:Eduard.Cerny@synopsys.com] 
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 4:56 PM
To: Miller Hillel-R53776; Havlicek John-r8aaau; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
Cc: shalom.bresticker@intel.com
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Proposal for 1392 - Mantis is ready

Hi Hillel,

I think that the proposal as you placed in the Notes on Manis is good.
If you receive no further comments from others, could you please format
and attach it to the bug as a formal proposal for SV-AC to vote on?

Thank you,

ed


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda-stds.org] On Behalf Of Miller Hillel-R53776
> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 2:14 AM
> To: Havlicek John-r8aaau; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Cc: shalom.bresticker@intel.com
> Subject: [sv-ac] Proposal for 1392 - Mantis is ready
> 
> Hi,
> I added John's comment and have completed the mantis for 1392. 
> Please comment if anything additional needs to be done before the 
> voting procedure.
> Thanks
> Hillel
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Havlicek [mailto:john.havlicek@freescale.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 3:00 PM
> To: Miller Hillel-R53776
> Cc: shalom.bresticker@intel.com; Miller Hillel-R53776;
> sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Proposal for 1392 - Clocking event syntax
> corrections
> 
> Hillel:
> 
> I think that we should not use the word "clocking" in the second case.
> For the second case, I think 
> 
>   "occurrence of the clocking event (posedge clk)" 
> 
> can be reduced to something like
> 
>   "occurrence of posedge clk" 
> 
> or
> 
>   "occurrence of the posedge clk event" 
> 
> 
> J.H.
> 
> > X-Authentication-Warning: server.eda-stds.org: majordom set 
> sender to 
> > owner-sv-ac@eda-stds.org using -f
> > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
> > Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:47:18 +0300
> > X-MS-Has-Attach: 
> > X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
> > Thread-Topic: [sv-ac] Proposal for 1392 - Clocking event syntax 
> > corrections
> > Thread-Index: 
> > AcaE5AkE8zJjeeV9TOqUqJ7HgZ8yNANJNZ/QAJ4n1zAAAaRf8AAdwVRAAAHA+DA=
> > From: "Miller Hillel-R53776" <r53776@freescale.com>
> > Cc: "Miller Hillel-R53776" <r53776@freescale.com>, 
> > <sv-ac@eda-stds.org>
> > X-Virus-Status: Clean
> > X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by 
> > server.eda-stds.org id k5L7ldDu016105
> > Sender: owner-sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jun 2006 07:51:21.0502 (UTC) 
> > FILETIME=[7CA33BE0:01C69507]
> > 
> > Shalom,
> > 
> > In the LRM wording "clocking events" appear in two possible 
> contexts:
> > 
> > 1) Reference to a piece of code with clocking event syntax.
> > 
> > 2) Discussion of the behavior that consists of clocking events.
> > 
> > To avoid confusion the sv-ac committee requested that these 
> two have 
> > different wordings.
> > We decided that the first case would have the "clocking event 
> > @(posedge clock)" wording and that the second case would have a 
> > different wording, such as "occurrence of the clocking 
> event (posedge 
> > clk)".
> > 
> > The author needs to decide whether the latter is the 
> correct wording 
> > and then apply it consistently throughout the LRM.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Hillel
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:52 AM
> > To: Miller Hillel-R53776; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> > Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Proposal for 1392 - Clocking event syntax 
> > corrections
> > 
> > I think it is just "clocking events".
> > 
> > > The author needs to check what is the correct wording for 
> > > "occurences
> > of
> > > clocking events". 
> > 
> > 
> > Shalom
> > 
> 
>