Hi Dmitry, Reviewed the parts assigned to me. > Clause 3 (relevant parts) - Tapan > Annex A - Tapan > Annex B - Tapan > Annex C - Tapan Seems alright, except for: 1. Mantis 2652, which suggests to update the BNF for checker_or_generate_item_declaration. However, the BNF in A.1.8 Checker items is not updated. (The resolution suggests changes in BNF at two places: section 17-1 and A.1.8. None of them is done.) 2. Mantis 2659, which talks about deprecated semantics (of sequence_expr). This deprecation is not listed in Section C. Although, it seems to be alright as per the resolution of this mantis. Warm regards, Tapan "You must be the change you want to see in the world" : Mahatma Gandhi ________________________________ From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Korchemny, Dmitry Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 6:28 PM To: sv-ac@server.eda.org Subject: [sv-ac] Draft P1800/D9-preliminary review Hi all, It is time to review Draft P1800/D9. Each SV-AC member is requested to review the implementation of Mantis items assigned to him/her, and in addition the assigned fragment of the LRM. The review is due by 07/10/2009. Please, send a notification when you are done, with the list of issues found or with the indication that the implementation is correct. If you find an issue with Mantis implementation, please, add a corresponding note to the Mantis with the indication of the actions required from the editor, and move the Mantis to the Editor status. If no issues have been found, keep the Mantis unchanged. Mantis list: 2661 "Syntax 16-19" is in blue Dmitry Korchemny 2660 Add indices to expressions Doron Bustan 2659 Backward compatibility issue with sequence property Doron Bustan 2658 Default values for untyped formals Dmitry Korchemny 2656 Clarify difference of $global_clock handling in simulation and formal verification Tom Thatcher 2652 Future value functions need clarification Erik_Seligman 2650 Ambiguity in a sequence repetition [*0] definition Erik_Seligman 2612 `true should have a backtick in a sequence example Dmitry Korchemny 2541 syntax errors - missing parenthesis Lisa Piper 2516 Another contradiction of existing text with 2398 needs to be fixed Erik_Seligman 2486 Scope of Annex F definition of "specify" is not clear. john_havlicek 2478 Clock flow subclause is not consistent with multiclocked property definition Dmitry Korchemny Fragments: Clause 3 (relevant parts) - Tapan Clause 15 (relevant parts) - Manisha Clause 16 Beginning - 16.8 (including) Ed 16.9 Ben 16.10 - 16.12 (including), 16.17 - Manisha 16.13 - Doron 16.14 - Lisa 16.15 - Tom 16.16 - 16.18 (including) Dmitry Clause 17 - Erik Clause 20 (relevant parts) - Manisha Clause 37 (relevant parts) - Bassam Clause 39 - Bassam Annex A - Tapan Annex B - Tapan Annex C - Tapan Annex F - John Annex N - Lisa Please, notify me if you are unable to review the assigned fragments/Mantis items. Thanks, Dmitry --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Wed Jul 8 01:03:31 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jul 08 2009 - 01:05:02 PDT