RE: [sv-bc] E-mail Ballot: Respond by Sun Sep 16 8am PDT

From: Bresticker, Shalom <shalom.bresticker_at_.....>
Date: Sun Sep 16 2007 - 03:52:56 PDT
I will vote in favor of all of them.
Although I think some of them could be better, they are all improvements
or at least no worse than the current text.

Comments:

> SVDB 1302 _x_Yes   ___No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1302

All these refer to selects of a packed array or something similar, and
even then the statement appears 3 times.

What about the range declaration? What about unpacked types?

I think a more general statement is needed which covers all the relevant
cases and only needs to be said once. 


> SVDB 1468 _x_Yes   ___No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1468

The proposal is an improvement, but Brad and Tom have been talking about
a better one.


> SVDB 1554 _x_Yes   ___No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1554

I won't object to the proposal, but I think the word "optional" in "any
optional dimension expression is a constant expression" is unnecessary
and confusing. If you say "optional", that implies there could be a
non-optional one. I would word it as,
"any dimension expressions, if present, are constant expressions".
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Sun Sep 16 03:53:35 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Sep 16 2007 - 03:54:03 PDT