[sv-ac] Re: JH comments on non-Annex F 1932

Hi Doron:

> What is the leading clock of q in ">>     @(c) ( @(d) p and q )"?

I would say that it is @(d).  I read this example as equivalent
to 

  @(c) @(d) (p and q)

I expect that one can argue that the LRM does not make this clear,
but some basic ideas of clock flow are that a clock flows from left to
right, into and across parenthesized subexpressions, but not through
another clock.

J.H.

> X-ExtLoop1: 1
> X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,257,1196668800"; 
>    d="scan'208";a="361640747"
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:26:42 +0200
> X-MS-Has-Attach: 
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
> Thread-Topic: JH comments on non-Annex F 1932
> Thread-Index: AchQ1K6lKr3/R3eoRwOuDdXagQ5rYQBA1tiQ
> From: "Bustan, Doron" <doron.bustan@intel.com>
> Cc: <sv-ac@eda.org>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 09:26:45.0383 (UTC) FILETIME=[9624A970:01C851D8]
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> What is the leading clock of q in ">>     @(c) ( @(d) p and q )"?
> 
> Doron
> 
> >>  What is not so clear is how the clock flow interacts with the
> parsing
> >>  resolution of operands, which may involve introducing implicit
> >>parentheses.
> >>  We may need to work out some more formal representation of the clock
> >>flow.
> >>
> >>  We have not defined @(c) as an operator, so we need to say, in a
> case
> >>  like
> >>
> >>     @(c) ( @(d) p until q )
> >>
> >>  whether @(c) or @(d) is the clock incoming to "until".
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.