[sv-ac] 1550, 1698, and Annex E.4

Hi Ed:

> I think it might be better to do so after 1550 and 1698 are done. It
> also might be better to define $rose, $fell, $stable (and $changed) in
> terms of $past, especially if the clock of the function does not agree
> with the clock of the assertion. 

O.k.

> Also, as far as I can tell, Annex E does not consider sampled values, ir
> rather it simply assumes that the i-th letter is the sampled value.
> There is no formalization of $sampled. Should there be? The time base
> would have to be extended to negative integers, no?

No, Annex E does not define sampled values or formalize $sampled.
I don't think it should.

What I am imagining is just that we need to make sure that Annex E
is consistent with Section 17 at the level of abstraction that is
in Annex E.  For example, we need to say that $past returns the 
initial value of its argument rather than X if the past clocking
event does not exist.  Etc.

J.H.


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