RE: [sv-ac] ballot result for 1769

Hello,

please find attached a new version of the proposal, following the
friendly amendments and the discussion in the meeting today.

I also posted the proposal on Mantis.

Best regards,
ed


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On 
> Behalf Of John Havlicek
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 7:35 AM
> To: sv-ac@eda.org
> Subject: [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.
> 
> 

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