Bresticker, Shalom wrote: > But why is the wording so different? > > I understood the wording of the hierarchcial identifier bullet, but not > of the previous bullet. > > An identifier in an override could also be a parameter defined in the > configuration. Good point -- that should be fixed. Probably to something similar to the hierarchical identifier wording. How about something like the following: If an identifier used in an override does not refer to a parameter or localparam of the configuration, then the identifier shall be the only term in the override expression and shall refer to a name in the context of the configured instance. Gord. > > Shalom > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gordon Vreugdenhil [mailto:gordonv@model.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 3:24 AM >> To: Bresticker, Shalom >> Cc: mills@lcdm-eng.com; Maidment, Matthew R; >> Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com; Clifford E. Cummings; Mark Hartoog; >> Francoise Martinolle; Karen Pieper; Rich, Dave; Steven Sharp; >> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com; Gran, Alex; Heath Chambers; Alsop, >> Thomas R; Warmke, Doug; michael.burns@freescale.com; sv-bc >> Subject: Re: [sv-bc] RE: E-mail Ballot Due Dec 17 8AM PST >> >> Shalom, I'll take a try on this. >> >> Bresticker, Shalom wrote: >>> Don, >>> >>> I did not understand the 3rd bullet on the 1st page: >>> >>> >>> -- If a reference to an identifier in the target instance >> context is >>> used in an override, it shall be the only term in the expression. >>> >>> What is this talking about? >>> >>> And why is the next bullet (-- A hierarchical identifier in a >>> parameter override shall be resolved starting in the context of the >>> configured instance. If a hierarchical identifier is used, >> it must be >>> the only term in the expression, i.e., a.b.c + 7 is invalid.) not >>> covered by it? >> >> Yes they are similar. The problem here is that what we want >> to restrict is that the only permissible binding is to all of >> an existing declared parameter. That makes late overrides >> simple and avoids some of the concerns that Mark had. >> >> Since is isn't really a "primary", I had listed both >> identifier and hierarchical ident separately in my original >> feedback to Don. >> That carried over here. I think just "identifier" would be >> Ok but didn't want others to assume that was just a >> non-hierarchical identifier. Suggestions here to be BNF >> precise would be welcome. >> >> >> Gord. >> >> >> >>> However, other than that and some minor editorial quibbles >> on the 1st >>> page, I don't have a problem with it. >>> >>> I think it is better placed as 32.4.3 rather than 32.9. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Shalom >>> >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---------- >>> *From:* Don Mills [mailto:mills@lcdm-eng.com] >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 12, 2007 5:12 PM >>> *To:* Bresticker, Shalom >>> *Cc:* Maidment, Matthew R; Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com; Clifford E. >>> Cummings; Mark Hartoog; Francoise Martinolle; Karen >> Pieper; Rich, >>> Dave; Steven Sharp; Gordon Vreugdenhil; >> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com; >>> Gran, Alex; Heath Chambers; Alsop, Thomas R; Warmke, Doug; >>> michael.burns@freescale.com; sv-bc >>> *Subject:* Re: E-mail Ballot Due Dec 17 8AM PST >>> >>> Likewise for proposal 2037 >>> BTW- I worked with my technical writer last night to clean up >>> grammar and I removed the section on positional >> notation. I think I >>> now have something we can address in the email vote. >>> >>> Bresticker, Shalom wrote: >>>> Since eda.org is down, here are the proposals for >> 1602, 2097, 2106. >>> -- >>> ========================================================== >>> Don Mills >>> mills@lcdm-eng.com >>> www.lcdm-eng.com >>> ========================================================== >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be >>> clean. >> -- >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 >> Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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. > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Dec 13 07:39:12 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 13 2007 - 07:39:52 PST