RE: [sv-ac] Mantis 1533

Now that 1667 addresses my concerns, we can close this item.

Thanks.
Manisha

-----Original Message-----
From: John Havlicek [mailto:john.havlicek@freescale.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 6:53 PM
To: Kulshrestha, Manisha
Cc: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Mantis 1533

Hi Manisha:

Have you had a chance to think about this yet?

J.H.

> X-Authentication-Warning: server.eda.org: majordom set sender to
owner-sv-ac@eda.org using -f
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 14:23:27 -0500
> Cc: sv-ac@eda.org
> From: John Havlicek <john.havlicek@freescale.com>
> Reply-To: john.havlicek@freescale.com
> X-eda.org-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
> X-Spam-Status: No, No
> 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: 01 Nov 2007 19:24:06.0584 (UTC)
FILETIME=[C512EB80:01C81CBC]
> 
> Hi Manisha:
> 
> Mantis 1533 says that the LRM is not clear about the types
> of local variables in properties and sequences.
> 
> In 1667, we now have:
> 
>    The data type of an assertion variable declaration shall be
>    specified explicitly. The data type shall be one of the types
>    allowed within assertions as defined in Subclause 16.5.1.
> 
> Does this resolve 1533?  
> 
> It seems to me that in 1533 you worry that local variables of class
> types are problematic rather than suggesting that we find a way to
> define the behavior of local variables of class types.
> 
> J.H.
> 
> -- 
> 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.