RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1682

Hi Tom,

I am attaching the updated version, see also my comments below.

Thanks,
Dmitry

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
Behalf Of Thomas Thatcher
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 10:28 PM
To: john.havlicek@freescale.com
Cc: sv-ac@server.eda-stds.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1682

I vote no on 1682.

The following paragraph is still not clear:

    An action block of an assertion containing next value functions
    is performed at the time when all the next values are actually
    computed, that is, at the global clocking tick that follows the
    assertion clock tick at which the final boolean expression of the
    assertion is evaluated.

    First, the paragraph only says that the "action block" is delayed.
For
    accuracy, it should say that the "evaluation" of the assertion is
delayed
    as well.

    My suggestion:

    An action block of an assertion containing next value functions
    is performed at the global clocking tick that follows the
    assertion clock tick at which the final boolean expression of the
    assertion is evaluated.  This allows the evaluation of the next
value
    functions to be delayed until the after the next values of the
signals
    referenced have been computed.

[Korchemny, Dmitry] Rewrote it as you suggested, except for "until after
the next values ..." instead of "until THE after the next values ..."
	
   In addition, we could add further explanation that in a simulation
context,
   the function $future_gclk(sig) could be evaluated by the equivalent
   (@$gobal_clk ##1 $past_gclk(sig))

[Korchemny, Dmitry] I would state it as (@$gobal_clk ##1 sig). But the
rewriting rule is not that simple since a future value function may be
written inside a boolean expression. Therefore I don't think it is
feasible to provide the rewriting rule in the LRM (it would be complex
recursive algorithm).

I found this sentence from the first paragraph a little cryptic and hard
to
follow.

    These functions include the capability to access the sampled value
at
    the previous (resp. the next) global clock tick that precedes (resp.
    follows) immediately the timestep at which the function is called.

I don't think the "resp." abbreviation is good style for a standard. How
about:

    These functions include the capability to access the sampled value
at
    the global clock tick that immediately precedes or
    follows the timestep at which the function is called.	

[Korchemny, Dmitry] Rewrote it as you suggested.

Tom

John Havlicek wrote On 09/25/07 12:34 PM,:
> Hi Folks:
> 
> This is the call to vote on the proposal for 1682.
> The document on Mantis is 
> 
> GlobalCLockPastNextValuefunctions1682_070912_dk.pdf
> 
> Please vote if you are eligible.  See the details below.
> 
> J.H.
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> 
> Ballot on Mantis 1682
> 
> - Called on 2007-09-25, final ballots due by 2007-10-02 T 23:59-07:00.
> 
> 
>  v[xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xx] Doron Bustan (Intel)
>  v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-x] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys)     
>  n[---------x-xxx---------x-x-xxx-x---x] Surrendra Dudani (Synopsys)
>  v[xx-xxxxxxxxx-xx-xxxxx-xxx-xxx-------] Yaniv Fais (Freescale)
>  t[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] John Havlicek (Freescale -
Chair)
>  v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Dmitry Korchemny (Intel -
Co-Chair)
>  v[xx-xxx-x--xx--xxxxx----------xx-xxxx] Manisha Kulshrestha (Mentor
Graphics)
>  n[-----------------xxxxx-------x-xx-x-] Jiang Long (Mentor Graphics)
>  n[---------x--xxx.....................] Joseph Lu (Altera)
>  v[xxxxxx..............................] Johan Martensson (Jasper)
>  n[--------------x--x-xx--xx-xxxxxxx-x-] Hillel Miller (Freescale)
>  v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx] Lisa Piper (Cadence)
>  v[-xxxxxxx-x-xxxxx-x..................] Erik Seligman (Intel)
>  v[-x--------xxxx-----xxxx-xx----------] Tej Singh (Mentor Graphics)
>  v[xx--xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Bassam Tabbara (Synopsys)
>  v[xxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxx...............] Tom Thatcher (Sun
Microsystems)
>    |------------------------------------ attendance on 2007-09-25
>  |-------------------------------------- voting eligibility for this
ballot
> |--------------------------------------- email ballots received
> 
> 
> 	Legend:
> 		x = attended
> 		- = missed
> 		r = represented
> 		. = not yet a member
> 		v = valid voter (2 out of last 3)
> 		n = not valid voter
>                 t = chair eligible to vote only to make or break a tie
> 

-- 
------------------
Thomas J. Thatcher
Sun Microsystems
------------------

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

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