Re: [sv-ac] comment on 1550

Hi John,
I will look at it on Tuesday morning.
Best regards,
Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org <owner-sv-ac@eda.org>
To: sv-ac@eda-stds.org <sv-ac@eda-stds.org>
Sent: Sat Jan 20 08:35:14 2007
Subject: [sv-ac] comment on 1550

Hi Ed:

I have not seen any discussion of the proposal for 1550.

I was supposed to call for a vote last Tuesday, but did not
since no one had said anything.

I looked back over 1550 and noticed something that should 
probably be changed.  You have left in the sentence

   "The value of the sampled value functions is updated
   in the postponed scheduling region and can be read
   in the subsequent time step."

However, we were supposed to have split the proposal so
that $past, $rose, $fell, $stable are dealt with in 
resolving 1698.  Therefore, I don't think we should be
prescribing in 1550 how _all_ of the sampled value 
functions update.

I think you should change this sentence to refer only
to $sampled.  

What do you think?

J.H.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


-- This message has been scanned for viruses anddangerous content by MailScanner, and isbelieved to be clean.