RE: [sv-ac] Q: verification statements

That term is defined at the beginning of 16.14. See also Mantis 1987.

Shalom 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Seligman, Erik
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:51 PM
> To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
> Subject: [sv-ac] Q: verification statements
> 
>  
> I've reviewed 1995 (concurrent assertions in loops) vs 1737 
> (fixing some language in 16.14.5).  They don't touch the same 
> part of the text, but I had a question about some phrasing 
> that I may need to sync up 1995 with.
> 
> 1737 uses the term "verification statements".  I forget, did 
> we agree that this is the best general term describing 
> assert, assume, and cover statements?  In that case, rather 
> than phrasing 1995 as "concurrent assertions" in loops, I 
> should probably modify the phrasing to "concurrent 
> verification statements".
> 
> But do we also need to change the title of section 16.14.5?  
> Right now it's "Embedding concurrent assertions in procedural code".
> 
> --
> 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.