Hi all, I noticed a typo in the updated version: in F.2.3.6 $rose was mentioned twice instead of $fell. Fixed it in the attached version (I am keeping the same file name for the updated version). Thanks, Dmitry -----Original Message----- From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Korchemny, Dmitry Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 10:52 PM To: john.havlicek@freescale.com Cc: sv-ac@server.eda.org Subject: [sv-ac] RE: feedback on 1731 Hi John, I am attaching the updated version, with font and typo fixes. Also uploaded it to Mantis. Thanks, Dmitry -----Original Message----- From: John Havlicek [mailto:john.havlicek@freescale.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 5:07 PM To: Korchemny, Dmitry Cc: sv-ac@eda.org Subject: feedback on 1731 Hi Dmitry: I went back through 1731. Below are my comments. By the way, the latest version of the proposal is not on Mantis. J.H. 2007-10-17 ---------- . In the text to be added to the end of 16.8.3, (Section 16.15 Note to editor: Section "Clock resolution") should be (see 16.15 Note to editor: Section "Clock resolution") . In F.2.3.6, I think that b,c, and e should be set in 10 pt. Roman Italic font. This is for consistency with the rest of Annex F. The use of Roman Italic is supposed to indicate that these are symbols rather than terminals. . For the changes to F.4.1, please check the fonts. The black text does not match the fonts in D4. b,c,e should be in Roman Italic. Also "@" should be in Courier. I use \def\ttat{{\mbox{\tt @}}} to get Courier "@" in math mode in LaTeX. . For the changes to F.4.2, please check the fonts. The black text does not match the fonts in D4. b,c,e,n should be in Roman Italic both in the black text and in the new blue text. In the blue text, there is a mistake: w^{i,j},{},{} |== ((c && e_2 ) ##1 (c &&e_2)[=n-1] ##1 1), e_2))##1 (c && e_2 )[=n-1] ##1 1) should be simplified to w^{i,j},{},{} |== ((c && e_2 ) ##1 (c &&e_2)[=n-1] ##1 1) Also, there should be a space between the second "&&" and the second e_2. . For the last comment 7. I think that the more precise language from 1550 with cross references should be used in F.4.2 to discuss the case when $past looks back too far and the initial values are used. in the feedback, my intention was to include the language as it is done in 1550. In other words, saying Otherwise, $past(e1, n, e2, c)[w^j] is the result of evaluating the expression e1 using the initial values of the variables comprising the expression. The initial value of a static variabel is the value assigned in its declaration, or, in the absence of such an assignment, it is the default (or uninitialized) value of the corresponding type (see 6.7, Table 6-1). The initial value of any other variable or signal is the default value of the corresponding type (see 6.7, Table 6-1). The cross reference to 16.8.3 is o.k., but it adds some challenge for someone looking back at 16.8.3 to find the right text. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 22 2007 - 06:33:40 PDT