FW: [sv-bc] E-mail Ballot: Respond by 8AM PST, Mon, Dec 10, 2007

From: Bresticker, Shalom <shalom.bresticker_at_.....>
Date: Mon Dec 10 2007 - 06:39:28 PST
I abstain on both 1809 and 2225 and vote Yes on all the others.

Regarding 1809, I had a minor issue with the following:

I wrote:

> Regarding "Other than for task and function names (see 22.7.1), 
> references shall only be made to names already defined in the 
> compilation unit. The use of an explicit $unit:: prefix only provides 
> for name disambiguation and does not add the ability to refer to later

> compilation unit items," this is a little ambiguous as to whether a
> $unit:: prefix can refer to later compilation unit items when those 
> items are tasks and functions.

Gord replies:
It wasn't my intent to restrict explicit $unit prefixing to already
visible tasks and functions.  The "doesn't add" was intended to apply to
only the normal names. How about:
     The use of an explicit $unit:: prefix only provides
     for name disambiguation and does not impact the legality of
references
     to later compilation unit items,

I also feel I don't understand it well enough.
Still, it seems an improvement on the current text.


Regarding 2225, I don't understand it well enough and I see that Steven
has some issues. Also, I agree with Steven that another use of 'module'
in 22.7 should apparently also be 'design unit'. Also, I think this
really should be treated together with 22.8, which has for example the
text,

"If an identifier is referenced with a hierarchical name, the path can
start with a module name, interface name, program name, instance name,
task, function, named block, or named generate block. The names shall be
searched first at the current level and then in higher level modules
until found. Because both module, interface, or program names as well as
instance names can be used, precedence is given to instance names if
there is a module, interface, or program named the same as an instance
name."

Finally, I think the text is too complicated and there should be some
examples. The existing examples only cover some very simple cases.

Shalom


SVDB 1339 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1339
SVDB 1345 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1345
SVDB 1571 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1571
SVDB 1583 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1583
SVDB 1809 ___Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1809
SVDB 2222 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2222
SVDB 2225 ___Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2225
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Wed Dec 12 21:43:32 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 12 2007 - 21:44:25 PST