Now it is really done. Sorry for the noise. Doron >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On >>Behalf Of Johan M?rtensson >>Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 4:37 PM >>To: Eduard Cerny >>Cc: Bustan, Doron; John Havlicek; sv-ac@server.eda.org >>Subject: Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1757 >> >>Ok fine by me I vote yes to AcceptRejecton1757.071122.2.pdf with the >>friendly amendments: >> >>16.12.3 Abort properties >> >>1) I think 'semantics' is in the singular in this context. >>2) Misspelling of expression_or_dist >> >>REPLACE >>The semantics of reject_on(expression_or_dits) property_expr are the >>same as not(accept_on(expression_or_dist) not(property_expr)). >>WITH >>The semantics of reject_on(expression_or_dist) property_expr is the >>same as not(accept_on(expression_or_dist) not(property_expr)). >> >> >>The first and second example (after the "For example," that is on a row >>of its own) are duals but the explanations are slightly different. The >>first states "the truth of p1 is ignored in deciding the truth of p", >>and the second one says "then the second term is ignored in deciding the >>truth of p". I think both should be explained in the same way otherwise >>some may think there is some essential difference. >> >>For example (explanation to the first example.) >>REPLACE >>If a becomes true during the evaluation of p1, the truth of p1 is >>ignored in deciding the truth of p On the other hand, if b becomes true >>during the evaluation of p2 then p evaluates to false. >>WITH >>If a becomes true during the evaluation of p1, then the first term is >>ignored in deciding the truth of p On the other hand, if b becomes true >>during the evaluation of p2 then p evaluates to false. >> >>Best Regards, >> >>Johan >> >> >> >> >>On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 06:26:46AM -0800, Eduard Cerny wrote: >>> I agree with Doron, >>> ed >>> >>> >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On >>> > Behalf Of Bustan, Doron >>> > Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 9:09 AM >>> > To: Johan Mårtensson >>> > Cc: John Havlicek; sv-ac@eda.org >>> > Subject: RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1757 >>> > >>> > Ed is the only one except us who already voted. >>> > Since we are going to discuss it in a larger context in 1932, >>> > I don't think it is a big dill. >>> > >>> > Doron >>> > >>> > >>-----Original Message----- >>> > >>From: Johan M?rtensson [mailto:johan.martensson@jasper-da.com] >>> > >>Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 3:21 PM >>> > >>To: Bustan, Doron >>> > >>Cc: John Havlicek; sv-ac@eda.org >>> > >>Subject: Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1757 >>> > >> >>> > >>Thanks, >>> > >> >>> > >>with that change I would vote yes. However I don't know if >>> > we can regard >>> > >>that as a sufficiently minor change to just continue >>> > voting, or if we >>> > >>need to call a new vote. Maybe someone has voted yes and >>> > liked the old >>> > >>order better. >>> > >> >>> > >>Johan >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 02:45:02PM +0200, Bustan, Doron wrote: >>> > >>> Johan, >>> > >>> >>> > >>> I have changed it to be the lowest precedence. >>> > >>> I don't have a strong opinion about precedence. >>> > >>> >>> > >>> Doron >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>-----Original Message----- >>> > >>> >>From: Johan M?rtensson [mailto:johan.martensson@jasper-da.com] >>> > >>> >>Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 12:30 PM >>> > >>> >>To: John Havlicek >>> > >>> >>Cc: sv-ac@eda.org; Bustan, Doron >>> > >>> >>Subject: Re: [sv-ac] call to vote on 1757 >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>Hi, >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>I vote no to AcceptRejecton1757.071122.pdf because I >>> > think we need to >>> > >>> >>discuss the precedence of the abort operators relative >>> > to the others a >>> > >>> >>little more. Following our discussion at Tuesday's >>> > meeting I see no >>> > >>> >>reason why the abort operators should have higher >>> > precedence than |->, >>> > >>> >>|=>, and if..else. I think users will find it intuitive that >>> > >>everything >>> > >>> >>to the right of the abort operator (with boolean) will >>> > be aborted. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>As far as I understand if the abort operators are given higher >>> > >>> >>precedence than |-> then for example 'accept_on (c) >>> > a|->b' will be a >>> > >>> >>syntax error because it will parse as '(accept_on (c) >>> > a)|->b' and >>> > >>> >>'(accept_on (c) a)' is a property_expr which is >>> > disallowed at the LHS >>> > >>of >>> > >>> >>|->. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>In PSL the abort operator has higher precedence than many of the >>> > >>> >>property level (FL) operator, but (as I mentioned in >>> > our previous >>> > >>> >>meeting), that makes sense because this operator is postfix. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>If the PSL abort operator would have had lower >>> > precedence that the |-> >>> > >>> >>operator then '{a}|->{b} abort c' would have parsed as >>> > '({a}|->{b}) >>> > >>> >>abort c' wheras the user probably has '{a}|->({b} abort >>> > c)' in mind. >>> > >>> >>Similar considerations seem to be applicable in relation to PSL >>> > >>> >>eventually!, until, always, never etc. which have lower >>> > precedence >>> > >>than >>> > >>> >>abort in PSL. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>Furthermore I think the SVA abort operators can be safely placed >>> > >>beneath >>> > >>> >>the 'if..else' operator since, I don't think the >>> > relative precedence >>> > >>of >>> > >>> >>these operators has any impact on the parsing of either >>> > 'accept_on (a) >>> > >>> >>if (b) then P else F' or 'if (b) then accept_on (a) P >>> > else accept_on >>> > >>(a) >>> > >>> >>F' >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>I also have some friendly amendments: >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>16.12.3 >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>I think 'semantics' is in the singular in this context. >>> > >>> >>REPLACE >>> > >>> >>The semantics of reject_on(expression_or_dits) >>> > property_expr are the >>> > >>> >>same as not(accept_on(expression_or_dist) not(property_expr)). >>> > >>> >>WITH >>> > >>> >>The semantics of reject_on(expression_or_dits) >>> > property_expr is the >>> > >>> >>same as not(accept_on(expression_or_dist) not(property_expr)). >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>16.12.3 Abort properties >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>The first and second example are duals but the explanations are >>> > >>slightly >>> > >>> >>different. The first states "the truth of p1 is ignored >>> > in deciding >>> > >>the >>> > >>> >>truth of p", and the second one says "then the second >>> > term is ignored >>> > >>in >>> > >>> >>deciding the truth of p". I think both should be >>> > explained in the same >>> > >>> >>way otherwise some may think there is some essential difference. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>For example (explanation to the first example.) >>> > >>> >>REPLACE >>> > >>> >>If a becomes true during the evaluation of p1, the >>> > truth of p1 is >>> > >>> >>ignored in deciding the truth of p On the other hand, >>> > if b becomes >>> > >>true >>> > >>> >>during the evaluation of p2 then p evaluates to false. >>> > >>> >>WITH >>> > >>> >>If a becomes true during the evaluation of p1, then the >>> > first term is >>> > >>> >>ignored in deciding the truth of p On the other hand, >>> > if b becomes >>> > >>true >>> > >>> >>during the evaluation of p2 then p evaluates to false. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>Best Regards, >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>Johan >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 02:52:00PM -0600, John Havlicek wrote: >>> > >>> >>> Hi Folks: >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> This is the call to vote on the proposal for Mantis 1757. >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> The document on Mantis is >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> AcceptRejecton1757.071107.pdf >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> Please vote if you are eligible. See the details below. >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> J.H. >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > >>---- >>> > >>> >>---------- >>> > >>> >>> Ballot on Mantis 1757 >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> - Called on 2007-11-20, final ballots due by >>> > 2007-11-26 T 23:59- >>> > >>08:00. >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xx] Doron >>> > Bustan (Intel) >>> > >>> >>> v[-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-x] Eduard Cerny >>> > >>(Synopsys) >>> > >>> >>> n[----------------x-xxx---------x-x-xxx-x---x] >>> > Surrendra Dudani >>> > >>> >>(Synopsys) >>> > >>> >>> v[xx-xxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xx-xxxxx-xxx-xxx-------] Yaniv Fais >>> > >>(Freescale) >>> > >>> >>> t[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] John Havlicek >>> > >>(Freescale >>> > >>> >>- Chair) >>> > >>> >>> v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] >>> > Dmitry Korchemny >>> > >>(Intel >>> > >>> >>- Co-Chair) >>> > >>> >>> v[xxxxxxxxx-xxx-x--xx--xxxxx----------xx-xxxx] >>> > Manisha Kulshrestha >>> > >>> >>(Mentor Graphics) >>> > >>> >>> n[------------------------xxxxx-------x-xx-x-] Jiang >>> > Long (Mentor >>> > >>> >>Graphics) >>> > >>> >>> n[---x------------x--xxx.....................] >>> > Joseph Lu (Altera) >>> > >>> >>> v[xxxxxxxxxxxxx..............................] Johan >>> > Martensson >>> > >>> >>(Jasper) >>> > >>> >>> n[---------------------x--x-xx--xx-xxxxxxx-x-] Hillel Miller >>> > >>> >>(Freescale) >>> > >>> >>> v[xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx] Lisa >>> > Piper (Cadence) >>> > >>> >>> v[xx-x-xx-xxxxxxx-x-xxxxx-x..................] Erik Seligman >>> > >>(Intel) >>> > >>> >>> n[-x-x----x--------xxxx-----xxxx-xx----------] Tej >>> > Singh (Mentor >>> > >>> >>Graphics) >>> > >>> >>> v[-x-xxxxxx--xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Bassam Tabbara >>> > >>> >>(Synopsys) >>> > >>> >>> v[xxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxx...............] Tom >>> > Thatcher (Sun >>> > >>> >>Microsystems) >>> > >>> >>> |------------------------------------------- >>> > attendance on 2007- >>> > >>11-20 >>> > >>> >>> |--------------------------------------------- >>> > 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 or >>> > 3/4 overall) >>> > >>> >>> n = not a valid voter >>> > >>> >>> t = chair eligible to vote only to >>> > make or break a >>> > >>tie >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> -- >>> > >>> >>> This message has been scanned for viruses and >>> > >>> >>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >>> > >>> >>> believed to be clean. >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >>-- >>> > >>> >>------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > >>> >>Johan Mårtensson Office: +46 31 7451913 >>> > >>> >>Jasper Design Automation Mobile: +46 703749681 >>> > >>> >>Arvid Hedvalls backe 4 Fax: +46 31 7451939 >>> > >>> >>411 33 Gothenburg, Sweden Skype ID: johanmartensson >>> > >>> >>------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > >>> >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > >>> 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. >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>-- >>> > >>------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > >>Johan Mårtensson Office: +46 31 7451913 >>> > >>Jasper Design Automation Mobile: +46 703749681 >>> > >>Arvid Hedvalls backe 4 Fax: +46 31 7451939 >>> > >>411 33 Gothenburg, Sweden Skype ID: johanmartensson >>> > >>------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > 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. >>> > >>> > >>> > >> >>-- >>------------------------------------------------------------ >>Johan Mårtensson Office: +46 31 7451913 >>Jasper Design Automation Mobile: +46 703749681 >>Arvid Hedvalls backe 4 Fax: +46 31 7451939 >>411 33 Gothenburg, Sweden Skype ID: johanmartensson >>------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>-- >>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 : Thu Nov 22 2007 - 06:56:51 PST