Hi Yaniv, Lisa also mentioned this, but it is not easy to find a good wording for this, at least it is not enough to drop the exception as you suggest. There are several limitations in the checker proposal (1900) applied to the checker body, e.g., only checker variables may be declared there, only initial_check and always_check may be used, etc. The code in the assertion action blocks is not affected by these limitations and follows regular SV rules. This proposal (2089) introduces a new entity in the checker: a final procedure, and this procedure may be put in the checker body. But the contents of this procedure are not a checker body: you cannot declare checker variables there, for example. I agree that the current definition is confusing, and everybody is welcome to suggest a more intuitive one. Thanks, Dmitry ________________________________ From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Fais Yaniv Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 11:12 AM To: Havlicek John; sv-ac@server.eda.org Subject: RE: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2089 I vote No on 2089 due the following reason: in page 2 it is said: Action blocks of assertions within a checker will be referred to as checker action blocks, and the rest of the checker, with the exception of any final procedure code, will be referred to as checker body but the following page has this section: A checker body may contain the following elements: ... * initial_check, and always_check, and final procedures Also page 3 (16.18.4 Checker procedures) says: The following procedures are allowed inside a checker body: * initial_check procedure, and * always_check procedure * final procedure I think this is contradictory (or at least I don't understand it) , what is the reason for the exception mentioned in page 2 ? if there isn't any I think it should simply be removed. Regards, Yaniv -----Original Message----- From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of John Havlicek Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 03:56 To: sv-ac@eda.org Subject: [sv-ac] call to vote on 2089 Hi Folks: This is the call to vote on the revised proposal for Mantis 2089. The document on Mantis is 2089_finalInChecker_20080115.pdf Please vote if you are eligible. See the details below. J.H. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------- Ballot on Mantis 2089 - Called on 2008-01-15, final ballots due by 2008-01-21 T 23:59-08:00. v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xx] Doron Bustan (Intel) v[xxxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-x] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys) n[----------------------x-xxx---------x-x-xxx-x---x] Surrendra Dudani (Synopsys) v[xxxxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xx-xxxxx-xxx-xxx-------] Yaniv Fais (Freescale) t[xxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] John Havlicek (Freescale - Chair) v[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Dmitry Korchemny (Intel - Co-Chair) v[xxxxx-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[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx..............................] Johan Martensson (Jasper) n[---------------------------x--x-xx--xx-xxxxxxx-x-] Hillel Miller (Freescale) v[xxxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx] Lisa Piper (Cadence) v[xxxxxx-x-x-xx-xxxxxxx-x-xxxxx-x..................] Erik Seligman (Intel) n[-------x-x----x--------xxxx-----xxxx-xx----------] Tej Singh (Mentor Graphics) v[xxxxxx-x-xxxxxx--xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Bassam Tabbara (Synopsys) v[xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxx...............] Tom Thatcher (Sun Microsystems) |------------------------------------------------- attendance on 2008-01-15 |--------------------------------------------------- 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. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , 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.Received on Mon Jan 21 01:36:18 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jan 21 2008 - 01:37:08 PST