[sv-ac] RE: Mantis 2491

OK... So does someone understand the issue Doron was pointing out? I still have the same basic question.

From: Bresticker, Shalom
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 2:59 AM
To: Seligman, Erik; sv-ac@server.eda.org
Cc: Bustan, Doron
Subject: RE: Mantis 2491

As far as I can see, this text has not changed since 1800-2005 17.14 except for changing "must" to "shall".

Shalom

From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Seligman, Erik
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 8:45 PM
To: sv-ac@server.eda.org
Cc: Bustan, Doron
Subject: [sv-ac] Mantis 2491

Hi guys-I took a look at this one that was assigned to me, and am not convinced there is an issue here. See the comment I added at http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/view.php?id=2491:

Erik_Seligman (developer)
2010-07-09 10:42
Top of Form

Bottom of Form
Top of Form

Bottom of Form
Top of Form

Bottom of Form

I looked at the rules in the text, and don't think I understand the conflict. (e) refers to inheriting the default clocking event, and (f) talks about cases where there is no default clocking event.

Does someone have a concrete example of a SVA fragment for which these two rules conflict?

Does someone have a better understanding of this issue? Or could this be another case where edits already fixed it & we just didn't note this in the ticket?

--
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.