[sv-ac] Champions feedback

Hi Folks:

As a proactive measure, I have attached Dave Rich's email ballot from
the latest Champions email vote.

This is not official feedback from Champions, but it is the vote that
Dave sent with comments and can be viewed on the Champions reflector.

J.H.


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


List of Mantis items for a Champion's email vote:
-------------------------------------------------
1.  2227    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___
            SV-EC  Incorrect comparison of $random and $urandom

2.  2181    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-EC  Ambiguity in implicit declaration of production variables in 
 	    randsequence

3 . 1447    Yes ___ No __X_ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-EC  Contradictory stmts about unsized array dimensions 
            (5.1 vs. 5.7 and 5.8)
Comments posted to sv-ec
4 . 0958    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-EC  dynamic array size method unclear when empty

5 . 1858    Yes ___ No _X__ Abstain ___ 
            SV-EC  Name binding in inline constraints
Need to get consensus on this issue, 

6 . 0520    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
            SV-EC  examples of queues assignments are not legal array 
            assignments

7 . 2003    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
            SV-EC  Old statement on foreach for wildcard indexed 
            associative arrays

8.  2221    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-BC  "unpacked array reference" is ambiguous
Close as duplicate

9.  2193    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___  
	    SV-CC  Need to clarify vpiValid flag
Close as duplicate
10. 2190    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  Standard does not say what should happen when putting value 
            with delay to a dynamic object
Close as duplicate
11. 2086    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  Deprecated vpiArray still used with vpi_register_cb() 
            description
Close as duplicate
12. 2063    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  Three minor typos in sections 36.15, 36.21 and 36.25

13. 2016    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  vpiClassType should apply to class typespec rather than to 
            class defn
Close as duplicate
14. 2009    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  HDL example shown in detail 3 section 36.14 (Reference 
            objects) has errors.

15. 1995    Yes ___ No _X__ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  Allow concurrent assertions and checkers in for loops
This proposal is essentially creating a generate block within a procedural context. I'm fine with limiting this to assertion statements for now, but that does alleviate addressing all the issues surrounding generated code. For example each assertion statement is replicated in the loop (including nested loops) and a generate block label needs to be created for every instance of each. The loop iterator should be treated as a genvar constant within each instance of the assertion statement.

16. 1952    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  "Null argument" to mean "omitted argument" may be confusing

17. 1846    Yes ___ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-BC  D3 21.13: add 1800-2008 to `begin_keywords
close as covered by 1826

18. 1826    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-BC  JEITA: Annex B Add keyword list by LRM version

19. 1741    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  1800-2005 Section 27.50 Issues with foreach diagram

20. 1729    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  Introduce immediate assume and cover statements

21. 1728    Yes ___ No _X__ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  Introduce "let" statement
It seems very odd that the let statement is allowed on an immediate assertion, which is no more complex than a 'if' statement, but not allowed in any Boolean expression. I understand the SV-AC rush to add features to the language and limiting those features to assertions, but limited this kind of feature to assertions does not serve the end user and the language very well. If there are issues preventing wider adoption of this feature, let then be flushed out now.

22. 1711    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-BC  Rules for unique case evaluation
Duplicate of 1345
23. 1668    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  Local variable initializers.

24. 1667    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  Local variable arguments for sequences and properties.

25. 1549    Yes _X__ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  add missing formal argument types

26. 1456    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  Clarify, circumscribe restrictions on use of DPI context 
            utilities

27. 0748    Yes __X_ No ___ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-CC  vpiParent of var select can only be array var

28. 1900    Yes ___ No _X__ Abstain ___ 
	    SV-AC  Add new 'checker' construct to SVA
This proposal needs to be addressed when it can have the full attention of all the committees as effects every part of the language. Otherwise, I feel that this enhancement goes beyond the level of enhancements authorized by the P1800 PAR in embedding a new language with SV. The number of keywords and statements being introduced can not be thoroughly reviewed with the resources we have for the current par. 

A suggestion would be to call a join meeting to have the SV-AC present this proposal to members of all the other committies as part of a design review.