Brad, on 1339 do you have a suggestion on how to reword this? "Any white-space characters preceding or following the macro text are not considered part of the macro text." What would you call the macro entity before we remove the pre and post white space? Maybe we can just say this instead: "Any white-space characters preceding or following the macro text will be removed from the macro text." On 1619, what percentage of the SV consumer population would you say uses non-ANSI ports? Is this something we can address later? -Tom >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org] On >Behalf Of Brad Pierce >Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 3:36 PM >To: sv-bc@server.eda.org >Subject: RE: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot: respond by Dec 3, 8am PST > >Matt, > >I vote Yes on all except > >>SVDB 1339 ___Yes _XX__No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1339 > > Reason -- The proposal would add "Any white-space characters preceding >or following the macro text are not considered part of the macro text." >This sentence is tautological, because what precedes or follows a thing >cannot be part of that thing. Also, there should be a concrete example. > >>SVDB 1571 ___Yes __XX_No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1571 > > Reasons -- > > 1) (Twice) In '"=" symbol', the '=' is not a symbol, but a token, and >it shouldn't be in quotations. > > 2) In Syntax 21-2, the = should be bold red. > > If these were corrected, I would withdraw my 'No' and vote 'Yes'. > >>SVDB 1619 ___Yes _XX__No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1619 > > Reason -- Some SystemVerilog users strongly prefer using non-ANSI >style port declarations, so I cannot accept the ANSI-only restriction. > >>SVDB 2102 ___Yes _XX__No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2102 > > Reasons -- I find the proposed language confusing. As Shalom asked, >why can't I have multiple continuous assignments to the same element as >long as they are to different bits? Also, it's not clear that it's >still illegal to mix procedural and continuous assignments to the same >bit. (Or is that to the same element? I can't tell.) > >> >>SVDB 2106 ___Yes _XX__No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2106 > > Reasons -- I'm fine with this, except that I don't understand the >first sentence. "A typedef may be used to give an existing data type a >user defined name, or to re-name another user-defined data type." Why >would the user-defined data type not be an existing type unless you had >a situation like > > typedef struct {int x;} T; > > in which case you would not be re-naming the type, but naming it for >the first time. > > >-- Brad > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of >Maidment, Matthew R >Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 12:12 AM >To: sv-bc@eda.org >Subject: RE: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot: respond by Dec 3, 8am PST > >I forgot to include: > >SVDB 2217 ___Yes ___No >http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2217 > >-- >Matt Maidment >mmaidmen@ichips.intel.com > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of >>Maidment, Matthew R >>Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 12:03 AM >>To: sv-bc@eda.org >>Subject: [sv-bc] e-mail ballot: respond by Dec 3, 8am PST >> >> >>-You have until 8am PST, Monday, December 3, 2007 to respond -An issue >>passes if there are zero NO votes and half of the eligible voters >>respond with a YES vote. >>-If you vote NO on any issue, your vote must be accompanied by a >>reason. >> The issue will then be up for discussion during a future conference >>call. >>-Note: For some issues, the proposed action is captured in the bug note >> (resolve as duplicate, already addressed, etc.). >> >>As of the November 12, 2007 meeting, the eligible voters are: >> >>Brad Pierce >>Shalom Bresticker >>Cliff Cummings >>Mark Hartoog >>Francoise Martinolle >>Karen Pieper >>Dave Rich >>Steven Sharp >>Gordon Vreugdenhil >>Stu Sutherland >>Alex Gran >>Don Mills >>Heath Chambers >>Tom Alsop >>Doug Warmke >>Mike Burns >> >>SVDB 329 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=329 >> >>SVDB 1338 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1338 >> >>SVDB 1339 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1339 >> >>SVDB 1548 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1548 >> >>SVDB 1571 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1571 >> >>SVDB 1619 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1619 >> >>SVDB 1957 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1957 >> >>SVDB 2102 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2102 >> >>SVDB 2106 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2106 >> >>SVDB 2152 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2152 >> >>SVDB 2163 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2163 >> >>SVDB 2169 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2169 >> >>SVDB 2170 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2170 >> >>SVDB 2178 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2178 >> >>SVDB 2184 ___Yes ___No >>http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2184 >> >>-- >>This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by >>MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. >> > >-- >This message has been scanned for viruses and >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >believed to be clean. > > > >-- >This message has been scanned for viruses and >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Fri Nov 30 16:25:35 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 16:25:50 PST