My votes are:
Mantis 1933 __X__ Yes ____ No
http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=1933
http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4737&type=bug
Mantis 2412 ____ Yes __X__ No
http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2412
http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4733&type=bug
We seem to saying that different clocking rules apply for the cases when @(seq.triggered) is used
a. Inside assertion
b. Outside assertion (i.e. procedural context)
In the case #a, the sequence "seq" has to be explicitly triggered (that's what appear from the clock inferring rules and from sentence "Note that if used in a disable condition or a clock expression in an assertion the sequence must be explicitly clocked."), whereas in the case #b, the sequence can be clocked with a default clock (in the absence of explicit clocking). Is this difference deliberate? Why do we want to differentiate b/w the two usages/contexts of the same expression?
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, January 27, 2011 12:56 PM
To: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] Call to vote: Due January 31
-You have until 11.59 pm PDT, Monday, January 31, 2011 to respond
-An issue passes if there are zero NO votes and half of the eligible
voters respond with a YES vote.
-If you vote NO on any issue, your vote must be accompanied by a reason.
The issue will then be up for discussion during a future conference
call.
As of the January 25, 2011 meeting, the eligible voters are:
Laurence Bisht
Eduard Cerny
Ben Cohen
Tapan Kapoor
Scott Little
Manisha Kulshrestha
Anupam Prabhakar
Erik Seligman
Samik Sengupta
Tom Thatcher
Mantis 1933 ____ Yes ____ No
http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=1933
http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4737&type=bug
Mantis 2412 ____ Yes ____ No
http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=2412
http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=4733&type=bug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Thu Jan 27 00:39:23 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 27 2011 - 00:40:46 PST