FYI, I am copying everyone separately since the champions alias seems to have not been working recently. Neil -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. Champions meeting minutes of November 28, 2007 8am - 10am PST Attendees: ---------- * Stu - Surrendra * Brad * Francoise * Shalom * John * Dave * Neil 1. List of Mantis items left over from the Champions meeting of November 8th. These were on the agenda but we didn't have time to review them in the meeting. The last set of 3 had issues flagged by at least one Champion in Nov 8th meeting. I did not record that set of issues (we were almost out of time). 1641 SV-AC need a way to specify severity for printing general error messages Stu - this seems to refer to another change already made. - __LINE__ and __FILE__ are defined in Mantis 1588 Move: Stu - approve the proposal for Mantis 1641 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously 1570 SV-CC Clarify legality of 'integer' and 'time' as DPI parameter types John - section number issue? Shalom - not a reason to not approve it Stu - mentions time as a 4-state packed array Shalom - looked at that, you need to look at the context Talking about interface versus C. Move: Stu - approve the proposal for Mantis 1570 Second: Dave Passed unanimously 2056 SV-BC 12.7.1: Description of for-loop step assignment is not precise Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2056 Second: Francoise Passed unanimously 1939 SV-BC Hexadecimal escapes in strings (Table 5-1) Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1939 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously 1278 SV-BC "initial" and "always" "constructs" versus procedural On October 29, 2007 the SV-BC approved resolving this item as it was already addressed. The approval was not unanimous. Cliff Cummings opposed as he prefers different terminology. Francoise Martinolle abstained as she prefers different terminology. Shalom - there was some additional discussion in svbc, not in mantis Move: Francoise - to approve the resolution for Mantis item 1278 "no change required" Second: Stu Passed unanimously 2. List of Mantis items that failed a Champions email vote: 1928 SV-EC clarification of coverpoint value resolution (18.5.6) Failed in the Champions 12-day email vote (ending Sept 17th). Was re-approved "as-is" by the svec by email vote. The following are from the svec Oct 1st, 2007 meeting minutes - there are some valid concern about the language in the proposal Some of that is due to the particular section of the LRM. - Mostly about how things are expressed, as opposed to content - terminology for enumeration value, for example - at one level, does agree it would be good to update it. - This is a fairly narrow technical issue - Want to get the change in, there is an important technical point John - the terminology is not consistent and clear in the proposal - re-approving the proposal is the judgment of the committee and he is ok with that Shalom - 1429 is on the sv-bc list, but most likely won't make the cut - 1429 is one of several on enums - 1928 is consistent with the current language in LRM. Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1928 Second: Stu Passed unanimously AI/Neil - open a new mantis item to capture this feedback from the champions (see 2223) 1871 SV-EC clarification needed for illegal/ignore transition bins Failed in the Champions 12-day email vote (ending Sept 17th). The proposal was updated and approved by email vote. Dave - Dave Scott changed the proposal John - agrees that the change does improve the language. his concern was addressed Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1871 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously 1737 SV-AC Incomplete fix from 1381 Failed in the Champions 12-day email vote (ending Sept 17th). The proposal was updated and approved by voice vote. John - had a dependency on 1768 and coloring issues (from email vote) Move: John - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1737 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 1731 SV-AC Sampled value functions with arbitrary clocks Passed with friendly amendments in the Champions 12-day email vote (ending Sept 17th). The proposal was updated and approved by email vote. Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1731 Second: John Passed unanimously 1723 SV-EC Size method for associative arrays Failed to pass in the Champions August 29, 2007 email vote with 2 no votes The proposal was updated and approved by voice vote. (2 no votes) Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1723 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 1609 SV-EC import statements should not be allowed in class scopes Failed to pass in the Champions August 29, 2007 email vote with 2 no votes The proposal was updated and approved by voice vote (Sept 6th). Stu - why use the word "directly"? FM - it means directly in the class scope. Dave - the word "directly" is not really needed. Brad - a function scope can there be an import inside a function within a class? "directly" usually means at current scope, and not lower ones. Dave - thinks it also means nested scopes - the same inheritance rules exist for methods and classes. FM - with import in class, issue with derived class using dif symbols. Dave - now thinks the word 'directly' is correct. FM - thinks it would be safer to completely disallow (eg in methods) AI/Neil - send feedback to committee that it might be best to extend to also include class methods. Move: Francoise - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1609 Second: Dave Oppose: Stu - thinks we need to know the intent of the word "directly" before sending this to the Working Group Passed with one no vote 1601 SV-AC new keyword for untyped formal arguments Failed to pass in the Champions August 29, 2007 email vote with 1 no vote We still need to address this no vote. In the meantime, some friendly amendments were made and approved by the technical committee (passed by email vote). Stu - friendly amendments - untyped keyword needs to be added to annex b. - also begin_keyword directive section also if needed. The Editor is to take care of both of these Shalom - 1846 - begin_keywords - hasn't yet passed the svbc - should have committees just mention what goes in annex b. then the Editor will update it when 1846 passes. John - wouldn't cause other things in ac to be held up if not approved. a user convenience Dave - mailbox - has no formal type associated with it. - would like to solve this if had time. could use the same keyword for mailboxes - 'untyped' is a type itself. Stu - ok allowing time for svec to consider it for use with mailbox. FM - there is a dependency on 1549 John - it should be made clear that the action item is for svec if the proposal is rejected. Shalom - ec needs to complete early enough to give feedback to ac. John - the deadline can be after the new year. - if ec wants a different mechanism - ac would need more time. Move: Shalom - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1601 Second: John Oppose: FM - wants to see if it can be applied in other places Dave - schedule doesn't allow time for complete review - appears to be significant enough to require review Stu - wants sv-ec to have time to review it Neil - it should go to the sv-ec For: John, Brad, Shalom Motion failed - the sv-ec will be given time to review this proposal 1580 SV-EC Access to interface objects via virtual interface Failed to pass in the Champions August 29, 2007 email vote with 2 no votes The proposal was updated and approved by voice vote (Oct 29th). Shalom - now satisfied with new language Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1580 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously 1336 SV-EC Rules for allowed statements in a function Failed to pass in the Champions August 29, 2007 email vote with 1 no vote The proposal was updated and approved by voice vote (Oct 15th - 1 no vote) Note: I just noticed that section 13.4 also needs to be updated in order to be made consistent with the changes in this proposal. We could create a new mantis item for that. Neil - 13.4.5 is in contradiction with 13.4 items c) and d) Stu - can we just strike out c and d? Dave - the whole section may need to be changed - yes, items c) and d) can be removed Shalom - the second part of d) must remain in the text - 13.4.3 automatic function versus automatic task - should these changes only apply to static functions? (eg not the automatics) Shalom - the proposal has 13.4.5 change - 2nd paragraph "in the context in which a side-effect is allowed..." Is this defined? Shalom - doesn't think we can approve it "as-is", it creates a contradiction. Stu - can't do the fix with a new Mantis item. Shalom - for 1340 we send it back - in order to force bc to work on it. Dave - this one is for different text than that touched by the proposal Move: Stu - send 1336 back to the sv-ec, address the conflict in 13.4 and to address restriction for NBA that tasks and functions have. 13.3.2 Second: Shalom Oppose: Dave - we need to make progress. prefers to open a new Mantis FM - agrees to opening a new Mantis item. Passed with 2 opposed - send it back to the sv-ec 3. List of Mantis items that have not yet been reviewed by the Champions. 2188 SV-AC Typo in 38.4.1 Placing assertion system callbacks Move: Stu - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2188 Second: Francoise Passed unanimously 2175 SV-AC D4 implementation feedback Move: Stu - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2175 Second: John Passed unanimously 2171 SV-AC Wrong usage of "property expression" in Reactive region description. John - 2 abstains - were due to 2 people not voting in email vote Stu - any backward compatibility issues? John - an action block is with a concurrent assertion construct Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2171 Second: John Passed unanimously 2142 SV-EC Unclear if type parameters may be used to specify class base class Brad - "real" should be in bold --- note it FM - two places require that change. AI/Neil - add a note to the Editor for this Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2142 Second: Francoise Passed unanimously 2141 SV-EC Unclear if type parameters can be used with scope resolution operator Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2141 Second: Francoise Passed unanimously 2087 SV-EC Semantic intent of qualified BNF terminals must be clarified Brad - why adding the qualified_term? Shalom - it is used in the following text of the proposal. Stu - section 1.6 might be a better place to locate it. - friendly amendment to duplicate it in 1.6 - put it in both places Brad - why not say define semantics of qualified_term? Dave - don't do here. FM - typo at the end - last array_identifier is spelled wrong Stu - strike word such and correct spelling Shlom - ok with word such. Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2087 with two friendly amendments 1. duplicate this text in 1.6 2. fix typo at the end - spelling of array_identifier Second: Stu Passed unanimously 2036 SV-BC Unique case and overlapping expressions in a case item Dave - wasn't this discussed this week in svbc? Stu - not this one. Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2036 Second: Shalom Abstain: Stu - the wrong thing to do. Was against it in the committee (couldn't vote there since he missed that meeting). Passed with one abstain 2025 SV-EC 5.9: The difference between string literals and array literals Move: Shalom - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2025 Second: Dave Passed unanimously 2021 SV-EC Relax excessively severe restriction on what can connect to a clocking inout Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2021 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 2007 SV-EC 7.9.4: rules about int type index for associative arrays Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2007 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 1897 SV-EC clarify "union of all significant bins" and "overlapping bins" in coverage computation Shalom - table number has changed in draft 4. (18-28 is now 18-1) AI/Neil - note to the the editor for table numbering. Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1897 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 1851 SV-EC all params declared inside class body are local Move: Shalom - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1851 Second: Dave Passed unanimously 1800 SV-AC Example with throughout in Clause 16.8.8 on pp332 of P1800-2008 Draft 4 is incorrect Stu - only adding parens - when it is tough to see a change - add a note Move: Stu - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1800 Second: John Passed unanimously 1679 SV-EC 3.6 string casting statement unclear Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1679 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 1608 SV-EC equality, inequality and conditional operator rules for class handles Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1608 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 1594 SV-EC conditional operator for class handles incorrect Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1594 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 1560 SV-EC Queue delete() method for entire array Dave - Why was word prototype changed to syntax? Neil - There was agreement that this was the right term in the committee Stu - syntax is also the not correct word. Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1560 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 1500 SV-EC Rules for allowed statements in a function Move: Dave - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1500 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 1494 SV-AC Infering enabling condition for coverage statement John - resolution is to close as a duplicate. AI/Neil - the proposal should be deleted or marked such that not to be done. Move: Brad - approve the resolution of duplicate for Mantis item 1494 Second: John Passed unanimously 1384 SV-EC bit stream cast and pack/unpack for protected./local members Brad - wants more time to review it. - what about word clause Stu - when refer to entire clause use word Clause (capitalized) Brad - last sentence should be shall? Stu - yes, (Shalom agrees) Issues with the word "shall" - probably ok, the Editor can deal with it. Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1384 Second: Dave Passed unanimously 1360 SV-BC 11.2: clarify that separate always_comb's to different variable selects are allowed Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1360 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously 1212 SV-BC Reversed cross-references to IEEE Std 1364 Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1212 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 1199 SV-AC Standard reporting mechanism for functional errors/warnings, etc. Move: Dave - approve the resolution of duplicate for Mantis item 1199 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 1197 SV-BC First class part selection operator Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1197 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously 1041 V-1364 12.5: case item expression ambiguity Move: Shalom - approve the proposal for Mantis item 1041 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 339 SV-EC typos in queue method descriptions Move: Shalom - approve the proposal for Mantis item 339 Second: Stu Passed unanimously 4. Next Meetings: ------------- - Champions - it was agreed to hold the following two Champions meetings Dec 20th Jan 10th - P1800 Working Group will meet on Dec 13th Jan 31stReceived on Sat Dec 1 20:19:56 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Dec 01 2007 - 20:19:59 PST