RE: [1076.1] Information on proposed IP support in VHDL-200X

Hi,

Victor's reply to Arpad also bounced. I'm reposting it below.

Best regards,
Alain Vachoux

-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Victor Berman" <vberman@cadence.com>
To: "Muranyi, Arpad" <arpad.muranyi@intel.com>,
         "1076.1 mailing list" <vhdl-ams@server.vhdl.org>
Cc: "Lance Thomson" <lancet@us.ibm.com>
X-Received: By mx-sanjose.cadence.com as k5L3rVwr025296 at Tue Jun 20 
20:53:32 2006
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88/1555/Tue Jun 20 15:21:12 2006 on 
server.eda-stds.org
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by 
server.eda-stds.org id k5L3rYDu013342

Arpad and All,

  I do not think that Synplicity is aware of the latest work in the
standard.  I plan to talk to them in the next few days so that their
well intentioned work will conform to the our standard.

Regards,
   Victor

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vhdl-ams@eda-stds.org [mailto:owner-vhdl-ams@eda-stds.org]
On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 9:00 AM
To: 1076.1 mailing list
Cc: Lance Thomson
Subject: RE: [1076.1] Information on proposed IP support in VHDL-200X

Has anyone seen this article?

http://eetimes.com/news/design/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=189500419

I wonder how this fits into the picture.  I would hate to see competing
standards because it will turn everything into tool dependent, and
non-interchangeable again...

Arpad
========================================================