[sv-dc] RE: Mantis 3398 - final comments

Replies in red

________________________________
From: owner-sv-dc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-dc@eda.org] On Behalf Of Bresticker, Shalom
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 6:55 AM
To: sv-dc@eda.org
Subject: [sv-dc] Mantis 3398 - final comments

 1. On the first page, in the paragraph after Syntax 6-2, there is a sentence,

"A user-defined nettype has no default type; a specified data type is required."

The second half of the sentence is a little awkward.
How about, "it is required to specify a data type"?
How about:
An explicit data type is required for a user-defined nettype.

 1. On page 5, a change to 7.2.2 appears twice, at the middle and at the bottom of the page.
The first one is correct, the second remains from the previous version of the proposal and is no longer correct.

 Right, second is now deleted.

 1. The proposed syntax for net_declaration uses '[ # delay_value | # ( mintypmax_expression ) ]'.
There is already such a non-terminal: delay_control.
In fact, Syntax 10-1 itself already uses it in the BNF for continuous_assign.

Yes changed to delay_control

 1. In 10.3.3, "left hand" needs a hyphen.

ok

 1. The change to the title of 23.3.3.3 uses the term, "builtin nettypes". This term is not used anywhere else, consider changing it. In any case, "builtin" should have a hyphen.

We could define in section 6.6 just before the table that there are 2 kinds of nettype: built-in and user-defined. Then change the introductory sentence to the table:

There are several distinct types of built-in net types s, as shown in Table 6-1.

Table 6-1- Built-in Net types

 1. The addition of the definition of net_type_identifier to the BNF appears on page 7 twice, in A.2.1.3 and A.9.3. It should appear only once. I think A.9.3 is the proper place.

right

 1. On page 7, the addition to 28.12 should be a separate pagragraph, I think. Anyway, it says, "Combining signal values for nets with user-defined nettypes shall follow the rules in 23.12 (Resolution of nets with user-defined nettypes)." There is no such section! Should it refer to 6.6.7?

 That's correct, there isn't any 23.12, it should refer to 6.6.7

Regards,
Shalom

Shalom Bresticker
Intel LAD DA, Jerusalem, Israel
+972 2 589 6582 (office)
+972 54 721 1033 (cell)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/shalombresticker

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.