-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. Toll Free Dial In Number: (866)839-8145 Int'l Access/Caller Paid Dial In Number: (215)446-3660 ACCESS CODE: 9301228 Champions May 8, 2008 Conference call Thursday 8-10am PDT Attendees: ---------- 1. * Stu Sutherland 2. - Surrendra Dudani 3. * Brad Pierce 4. - Francoise Martinolle 5. * Shalom Bresticker 6. * John Havlicek 7. - Dave Rich 8. * Neil Korpusik 9. - Karen Pieper List of Mantis items for the next Champions meeting. May 8, 2008. 8-10am PDT. 1. Review IEEE patent policy ref: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Neil - The new patent policy was reviewed. 2. List of Mantis items for review 2.1 2373 SV-BC 10-1. Does the result of a cont. assign to a variable update immediately when the variable is released? - fixed - On April 28, 2008 the SV-BC unanimously approved the attached proposal. Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2373 Second: John Passed unanimously 2.2 2279 SV-EC Followup questions related to Mantis item 1858 - bnf for randomize - fixed - Feedback from the Champions on 1858. - Approved on April 22 2008, unanimously, by email vote. Proposal: proposal-2279-jb3a.pdf John - why is part of the syntax not in annex A? Shalom - there are a lot like this. Stu - system tasks, for example are not in annex A. Brad - the method calls are not always in the bnf. Shalom - can only call a method for a type for which it is defined. - can't call randomize on an enum for example. Brad - it seems wrong to him also - can only have "not in annex A" if it is a specialization of what is already in the bnf. Shalom - was thinking it is ok. Brad - randomize calls are not like other method calls, since it uses the "with" clause. - doesn't think of it as a method call. - subroutine call Sahlom - there are two randomize forms. - it is confusing that there are two forms of randomize. Move: Shalom - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2279 Second: Brad Passed unanimously 2.3 2235 SV-BC Clarifications needed for "ref" mode actuals - fixed - On March 25, 2008 the SV-BC approved the attached proposal. Two members abstained from the vote: Shalom (the term indexed select is misleading) Francoise (Unsure if this is an improvement) - The proposal was sent back to the SV-BC by the Champions in the April 10th, 2008 conference call. The whole definition of what is a variable is being brought into question. The phrase "indexed select" is used in the proposal. This phrase is not defined in the LRM. The Champions would like to see the proposal reworded. - The proposal was updated - the offending language was reworded. - On April 28, 2008 the SV-BC unanimously approved the attached proposal, 2235_ref_mode_actuals_p2.pdf. Move: Brad - approve the proposal for Mantis item 2235 Second: Shalom Passed unanimously Mantis items in the resolved state, but do not need to be on the agenda 2327 SV-AC 2173 adds property case, need to add vacuity definition and multi clocking behavior in it - Dependency on 2173, which is in the feedback state. 2326 SV-AC add VPI diagrams for property case - Dependency on 2173, which is in the feedback state. 2237 SV-AC VPI additions for 1667 - Dependency on 1503, which is in the feedback state 3. Next meeting May 22, 2008 8am-10am (PDT)Received on Mon May 19 17:48:52 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 19 2008 - 17:48:55 PDT