[sv-ac] ballot result for 1769

Hi Folks:

Our ballot on 1769 passed with friendly amendments.

See the results below.

J.H.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ballot on Mantis 1769

- Called on 2008-01-15, final ballots due by 2008-01-21 T 23:59-08:00.

yv[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xx] Doron Bustan (Intel)
yv[xxxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-x] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys)     
 n[----------------------x-xxx---------x-x-xxx-x---x] Surrendra Dudani (Synopsys)
yv[xxxxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xx-xxxxx-xxx-xxx-------] Yaniv Fais (Freescale)
 t[xxxx--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] John Havlicek (Freescale - Chair)
yv[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxx] Dmitry Korchemny (Intel - Co-Chair)
yv[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)
yv[xxxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx] Lisa Piper (Cadence)
yv[xxxxxx-x-x-xx-xxxxxxx-x-xxxxx-x..................] Erik Seligman (Intel)
 n[-------x-x----x--------xxxx-----xxxx-xx----------] Tej Singh (Mentor Graphics)
yv[xxxxxx-x-xxxxxx--xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Bassam Tabbara (Synopsys)
yv[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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments [Rationale for retracted negative vote]

[LP]

I would think it would appear in chapter 20 "I/O system tasks and
functions". Chapter 21 describes compiler `directives.

We need to be consistent on what these are called, and that should be
the title of the section too. I like "elaboration system tasks".  I see
it referred as "elaboration action task", "elaboration action system
task", "severity system task", and "elaboration action".  There is also
a typo in which system appears twice "All of the elaboration action
system system tasks shall....."  I don't like using the word "action"
because I jumped to the conclusion that there were action blocks
associated

"If $elab_fatal is executed then after outputting the message the
elaboration is aborted. This also means that any remaining elaboration
action task calls may not be executed."   ("may" should be "shall")

What the user really needs for debug is not only the file and name of
where the call is made, but where the constant is set especially if it
is a constant function call.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friendly Amendments

[BT]

Change occurrences of "severity system task" to "elaboration action system task".


[DB]

Page1 paragraph 2, replace:

"If a call to such a task remains in the elaborated model after any
generate block expansion, the task is executed."

=20

With

"If a call to such a task remains after the elaboration of the model,
the task is executed."


[DK]

* Page 1. "The tasks must be called outside procedural code ..." -> "...
shall be called ..."?

* Page 1.=20
"If $elab_fatal is executed then after outputting the message the
run-time code generation is immediately aborted. This also means that
any remaining elaboration action task calls may not be executed.
If $elab_error is executed then the message is issued and compilation
continues. However, no simulation run-time code is generated.
The other two tasks $elab_warning and $elab_info only output their text
message but do not affect the compilation and run-time code generation."

The terms defined in the LRM are "elaboration" and "simulation". Also
from 3.10 it looks like that the "compilation" means the processing
before the elaboration.

I would rephrase these statements as:
"If $elab_fatal is executed then after outputting the message the
elaboration is immediately aborted. This also means that any remaining
elaboration action task calls may not be executed.
If $elab_error is executed then the message is issued and the
elaboration continues. However, no simulation shall be executed.
The other two tasks $elab_warning and $elab_info only output their text
message but do not affect the rest of the elaboration and the
simulation."

Note also the spacing between these three paragraphs.

* Page 2. First example:

Should be if ((N <=3D 0) || (N > 8))


[MK]

I looked at the attached file and it still has old wording like: If
$elab_fatal is executed then after outputting the message the run-time
code generation is immediately aborted. This also means that any
remaining elaboration action task calls may not be executed.

I think the run time code generation refers to a specific implementation
so it should be rephrased as: If $elab_fatal is executed then after
outputting the message the elaboration fails immediately. This also
means that any remaining elaboration action task calls may not be
executed.

Also the following should be rephrased:

If $elab_error is executed then the message is issued and the
elaboration continues. However, no
simulation run-time code is generated.

As

If $elab_error is executed then the message is issued and the
elaboration continues however, a
simulatable model does not result.

[LP]

1. it should go in chapter 20 "I/O system tasks and functions"
2. All references should be consistently called "elaboration system
tasks"

I am also not sure if it should be "may not" or "shall not" so if nobody
else complains then it should remain as is.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.