[sv-ac] FW: [SystemVerilog P1800 0002557]: Rules for passing automatic variables to sequence subroutines are not clear

I have posted a new version that implements Shalom's friendly amendment.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Accellera Mantis Bug Tracker [mailto:mantis@eda.org]
>Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 8:13 PM
>To: Seligman, Erik
>Subject: [SystemVerilog P1800 0002557]: Rules for passing automatic
>variables to sequence subroutines are not clear
>
>
>The following issue has been REOPENED.
>======================================================================
>http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2557
>======================================================================
>Reported By: Dmitry Korchemny
>Assigned To: Erik_Seligman
>======================================================================
>Project: SystemVerilog P1800
>Issue ID: 2557
>Category: SV-AC
>Reproducibility: always
>Severity: minor
>Priority: normal
>Status: feedback
>Type: Errata
>======================================================================
>Date Submitted: 2009-01-06 09:51 PST
>Last Modified: 2011-02-12 20:12 PST
>======================================================================
>Summary: Rules for passing automatic variables to
>sequence
>subroutines are not clear
>Description:
>In "16.11 Calling subroutines on match of a sequence" it is written:
>
>An automatic variable shall not be passed as an argument to a subroutine
>call either as input or ref type. An
>automatic variable may be used as a constant input for a subroutine call
>from an assertion statement in procedural
>code (see 16.15.5).
>
>This rule is contradictory, and probably the sentence "An automatic
>variable shall not be passed as an argument to a subroutine call either
>as
>input or ref type." should be deleted.
>
>Also note that the reference 16.15.5 is wrong, it should be 16.15.6
>======================================================================
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (0007815) Shalom Bresticker (manager) - 2009-01-07 02:27
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2557#c7815
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>See thread starting at http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ac/hm/8319.html.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (0009561) Dmitry Korchemny (manager) - 2010-07-20 12:00
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2557#c9561
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Approved by voice vote 2010-07-20: 13y/0n/0a.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (0009990) Neil Korpusik (administrator) - 2010-11-06 20:05
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2557#c9990
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>The proposal was opposed by the Champions in the email vote which ended
>on October 30, 2010.
>
>Shalom - Opposed
> I don't understand the reference to 6.24.
>
>Dave - Friendly amendment
> In the sentence added, should it be "nor" instead of "or"?
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (0010236) Dmitry Korchemny (manager) - 2011-01-18 11:16
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2557#c10236
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>The proposal ( proposal_2557.pdf) approved by the voice vote 2011-01-17:
>7y/0n/0a.
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (0010426) Neil Korpusik (administrator) - 2011-02-12 20:12
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/view.php?id=2557#c10426
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>The proposal was approved by the Champions with friendly amendments
>in the email vote which ended February 7, 2011.
>
>Shalom
>
> The proposal changes "An automatic variable may be used as a constant
> input" to "An automatic variable can be passed as a constant input".
> I think the original "may be" is better than "can be" here.
>
>Issue History
>Date Modified Username Field Change
>======================================================================
>2009-01-06 09:51 Dmitry KorchemnyNew Issue
>2009-01-06 09:51 Dmitry KorchemnyType => Errata
>2009-01-07 02:21 Shalom BrestickerIssue Monitored: Shalom Bresticker
>
>2009-01-07 02:27 Shalom BrestickerNote Added: 0007815
>2009-01-07 02:50 Dmitry KorchemnyDescription Updated
>2010-06-28 04:47 Dmitry KorchemnyStatus new =>
>assigned
>2010-06-28 04:47 Dmitry KorchemnyAssigned To =>
>Erik_Seligman
>2010-07-09 11:52 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2010-07-09 11:52 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2010-07-16 09:26 Erik_Seligman File Deleted: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2010-07-16 09:26 Erik_Seligman File Deleted: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2010-07-16 09:26 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2010-07-16 09:26 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2010-07-20 12:00 Dmitry KorchemnyNote Added: 0009561
>2010-07-20 12:00 Dmitry KorchemnyStatus assigned =>
>resolved
>2010-07-20 12:00 Dmitry KorchemnyResolution open => fixed
>2010-07-20 12:00 Dmitry KorchemnyFixed in Version => 1800-2012
>2010-11-06 20:05 Neil Korpusik Note Added: 0009990
>2010-11-06 20:05 Neil Korpusik Status resolved =>
>feedback
>2010-11-06 20:05 Neil Korpusik Resolution fixed =>
>reopened
>2011-01-18 09:49 Erik_Seligman File Deleted: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2011-01-18 09:49 Erik_Seligman File Deleted: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2011-01-18 09:49 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2011-01-18 09:49 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2011-01-18 09:52 Erik_Seligman File Deleted: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2011-01-18 09:52 Erik_Seligman File Deleted: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2011-01-18 09:53 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.docx
>
>2011-01-18 09:53 Erik_Seligman File Added: proposal_2557.pdf
>
>2011-01-18 11:15 Dmitry KorchemnyNote Added: 0010236
>2011-01-18 11:15 Dmitry KorchemnyStatus feedback =>
>resolved
>2011-01-18 11:15 Dmitry KorchemnyResolution reopened =>
>fixed
>2011-01-18 11:16 Dmitry KorchemnyNote Edited: 0010236
>2011-02-12 20:12 Neil Korpusik Note Added: 0010426
>2011-02-12 20:12 Neil Korpusik Status resolved =>
>feedback
>2011-02-12 20:12 Neil Korpusik Resolution fixed =>
>reopened
>======================================================================
>
>
>--
>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.