Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549

Hi Lisa:

I agree with you, this should be a separate mantis.

We should not reject proposals based on defects in locator 
text that happens to appear in them.

J.H.

> X-Authentication-Warning: server.eda-stds.org: majordom set sender to owner-sv-ac@eda.org using -f
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 23:32:18 -0400
> X-MS-Has-Attach: 
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
> Thread-Topic: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549
> Thread-Index: AcfeiQ52OKcMoqhRQC+dKxDIPbJwOwADZVDwABotlYAAMwPDUAAn0RLA
> From: "Lisa Piper" <piper@cadence.com>
> Cc: <sv-ac@eda-stds.org>
> X-Received: By mx-sanjose.cadence.com as l7H3Wjqk026662 at Thu Aug 16 20:32:48 2007
> X-eda.org-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
> X-Spam-Status: No, No
> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by server.eda-stds.org id l7H3Wk1f005401
> Sender: owner-sv-ac@eda.org
> X-eda.org-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
> X-eda.org-MailScanner-From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 03:34:02.0163 (UTC) FILETIME=[74659030:01C7E07F]
> 
> This quote was from the previous section of the standard, not from the
> proposal.  We should open another Mantis item to fix this. I'm afraid if
> I try to add it to this, it will continue to ripple to other things.
> 
> lisa
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Bresticker, Shalom
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:16 AM
> To: Bustan, Doron; Yaniv.Fais@freescale.com
> Cc: sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1549
> 
> The LRM states in other places restrictions on the use of $. 
> The question is whether the example fulfills those conditions.
> 
> The following quoted wording is a little unclear: 
> 
> > An actual argument can replace any of the following:
> > - Identifier
> > - Expression
> > - Event control expression
> > - Upper delay range or repetition range if the actual argument is $
> 
> "can replace" seems a little problematic here.
> An actual argument cannot really replace an expression. E.g., it cannot
> replace a+b. It can replace a formal argument which is used as an
> expression, which is a little different.
> 
> And does this list cover all the possibilities, or is it just intended
> to be examples?
> 
> And does the last item mean:
> 1. If the actual argument is $, it can be used only in this way? If it
> is not $, can it be used in this way?
> 2. It can be used in this way only if it is $? If it is $, can it be
> used in another way?
> 
> Thanks,
> Shalom
> 
> -- 
> 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 and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> 
> 

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