RE: [vhdl-200x-ft] New code release

All,

I called Claudio today and expressed our concerns with a focus on hindrance
of standards adoption if the packages are not easily available. He is
working on better guidelines for how IEEE copyrighted material is shared and
will be reviewing what we have on the web and getting back to me with
specific recommendations.

Of course, whether we include the package bodies in the LRM has other
implications as we discussed on the phone Monday and Peter has identified
other issues. Hopefully, we can make the decisions based on those
considerations.

-Steve Bailey

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org
> [mailto:owner-vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org] On Behalf Of Peter Ashenden
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 10:56 PM
> To: 'David Bishop'; vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [vhdl-200x-ft] New code release
>
> David and all,
>
> If we follow the approach of standardizing the package
> declarations and not the bodies, we'll have to describe the
> semantics of the operations in some form, such as English
> prose. (This is currently the approach used for
> std.textio.) My preference would be to specify the semantics
> in VHDL (as was done in 1164 and 1076.3) since it is a more
> precise form of specification.
>
> If you were to offer the package bodies as recommended
> implementations, that would beg the question of who is doing
> the recommending. If it's IEEE (eg, as a Recommended
> Practice), the recommendation would have to take the form of
> an IEEE standards publication, and so you would not avoid the
> copyright issue. If it's VASG, that's part of IEEE, so same
> applies. If it's some other organization or individual, then
> under what authority would they make such a recommendation?
>
> So unfortunately, I don't think we can realistically avoid
> the package bodies being subject to the same IP rules as the
> package declarations.
>
> Steve, have you and Dennis had an opportunity to follow this
> up with Claudio?
>
> Cheers,
>
> PA
>
> --
> Dr. Peter J. Ashenden peter@ashenden.com.au
> Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd. www.ashenden.com.au
> PO Box 640 Ph: +61 8 8339 7532
> Stirling, SA 5152 Fax: +61 8 8339 2616
> Australia Mobile: +61 414 70 9106
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org
> > [mailto:owner-vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org] On Behalf Of David Bishop
> > Sent: Tuesday, 24 August 2004 05:37
> > To: vhdl-200x-ft@eda.org
> > Subject: [vhdl-200x-ft] New code release
> >
> >
> > I have updated
> > http://www.eda-twiki.org/vhdl-200x/vhdl-200x-ft/packages/files.html
> > again.
> >
> > This time I have done the following:
> > All packages are now separated from their package bodies.
> > All packages have the IEEE copyright header and the
> copyright constant
> > in them. All package bodies are now "recommended
> implementations" of
> > the packages, and have had their IEEE headers and copyright data
> > removed.
> >
> > Now we only need to publish the packages, not the bodies,
> and we can
> > leave the package bodies on the web page (Peter, please
> check). This
> > also decreases the size of the spec.
> >
> > All IEEE copyright headers are being removed from all of the test
> > routines as well. These now cover 98% of the packages, and
> will cover
> > 100% when I am done.
> >
> > Other things done:
> > dwrite, dread, and to_dstring functions removed (you will see a new
> > file called "boneyard.vhd" in the directory listing which
> has these in
> > it (NEVER delete debugged code)) Added
> > to_signed(unsigned) and to_unsigned(signed) to numeric_bit and
> > numeric_std Added sread and swrite procedures to std.textio
> redesigned
> > hread and oread to be more forgiving.
> >
> > 95,285 lines of code and still growing....
> >
>
>
>
Received on Wed Aug 25 08:57:29 2004