See the attachment for details. Neil -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Neil Korpusik Tel: 408-276-6385 Frontend Technologies (FTAP) Fax: 408-276-5092 Sun Microsystems email: neil.korpusik@sun.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. Results of Champions and P1800 Working Group reviews of SV-AC mantis items: - At the P1800 Working Group meeting this morning all of the mantis items that were passed by the Champions were approved by the P1800. This includes those mantis items that were approved by the Champions in their 5-day email vote which concluded yesterday. - The two mantis items that failed the Champions email vote will be on the agenda for the next Champions meeting. It is still possible for these to pass at the next Champions meeting, since it only takes one no vote during an email vote to cause a proposal to fail. - Those mantis items with friendly ammendments can not be sent to the Editor until the friendly amendments are made by the Technical Committee. This requirement was stipulated in the motion made in the P1800 Working Group meeting this morning. - I am the person that sends mantis items to the Editor. - Those mantis items that were flagged as needing a pdf file should have the existing proposal re-uploaded in a .pdf file. Results of the 5-day Champions email vote: - This email vote ended at 5pm PST, Aug 29 SV-AC Mantis items ------------------ 1. 1550 passed - friendly ammendments suggested 2. 1567 passed - the proposal should be in a pdf file 3. 1722 passed - friendly ammendments suggested 4. 1591 passed - the proposal should be in a pdf file 5. 1601 failed 6. 1704 passed 7. 1729 failed 8. 1768 passed - friendly ammendments suggested 9. 1466 passed Details of the Champions 5-day email vote are summarized below SV-AC Mantis items passed by the Champions after making friendly ammendments: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 1550 friendly ammendments suggested 1) All references to "preponed" should be "Preponed". This is to make the capitalization of event region names consistent with a change made by the SV-EC in another Mantis item, already incorporated in draft 3a. 2) The changes to clause 16.8.3 add in two places new text describing that $sampled returns default uninitialized values under certain conditions. I recommend that these two new descriptions end with a cross reference: "(see 6.7, Table 6-1)". [clause and table numbers per draft 3a] 2. 1567 the proposal should be in a pdf file 3. 1722 friendly ammendments suggested 9) The editor, when implementing 1722, change occurences of "bind instantiation" to "bind_instantiation" and occurrences of "interface instantiation" to "interface_instantiation". SV-AC Mantis items sent back to the committees for updates: ----------------------------------------------------------- 4. 1591 the proposal should be in a pdf file 5. No 1601 1 no vote I still believe this enhancement needs a thorough review across all committees. It adds additional complexity for what may be an interim solution. There still may be time for this in the 2008 LRM, but if not, the penalty for not approving this seems to be one of convenience. Friendly ammendments suggested 1) From: "This semantics is described in Subclause 16.7." To: "This semantics is described in 16.7." 2) In "The formal arguments w and y of foo2 are untyped, while the formal argument x has data type bit," the word "bit" should be bold. 6. 1704 7. No 1729 2 no votes 1) The following text is unclear as to what behavior is only optional/recommended and what is required: "The immediate cover statement is used to detect the occurrence of specific signal values in the procedural code. The tools can collect such information in a database and then report the results at the end of simulation. The reporting should include the number of times the cover statement expression was true and in that sense it is equivalent to recording the success of an assert statement on the same expression. cover statements can also be used as search targets in formal tools. The results of a cover statement shall contain the following: - Number of times succeeded - Number of times failed" 2) Most of the text says "can", "should", but the last sentence says "shall". 3) Also, the following is confusing to the reader as it refers to the BNF without saying so: "In addition, statement_or_null is executed every time expression is true." And if so, 'expression' should be in a different font than the rest of the sentence as well as 'statement_or_null'. 4) The distinction between the optional and mandatory requirements of reporting the results of executing an immediate cover is not clear. 8. 1768 friendly ammendments suggested 8) Change 'Type' of 1768 in svdb from Clarification to Enhancement 10) The editor, when implementing 1768, add + and * to cycle_delay_const_range_expression instead of adding ##[+] and ##[*] to cycle_delay_range. SV-AC Mantis items rejected by the Champions: --------------------------------------------- 9. 1466 1 abstain 1) I abstain on this item because I feel the change is unnecessary. It does not add new functionality, and only makes assertion sequences even more cryptic. 2) If I had had voting privileges on the AC committee, I would have voted against this enhancement. 3) I would vote against it if I had voting privileges at the P1800 working group level. 4) I do not feel it is appropriate to vote NO on this at the champions level, because the champions charter is different.Received on Thu Aug 30 16:19:36 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 30 2007 - 16:19:59 PDT