[sv-bc] RE: E-mail Ballot Due Dec 17 8AM PST

SVDB 1397 ___Yes   _x_No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1397

Afraid of back-compatibility problems.

SVDB 1809 ___Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1809

I vote Yes on Gord's version. I don't like the import which is not bound
to afterwards, but that is not enough for me to vote No.

Friendly amendments:
In 3.10.1, Gord changed "see 22.6" to "see 22.6 and 22.7". Mantis 1212
corrected "22,6" to be "22.7", so it should just stay as "see 22.7".
In 13.7, "Section 22.7.1" should be just "22.7.1".

I will vote No on Francoise's version, on the general grounds that it
seems difficult to understand and does not yet seem ready. A specific
problem I have is that it says, "If the identifier is not a function or
task call, The following algorithm is repeated for each scope S". I did
not understand what scopes are included, i.e., each scope S out of what
set of scopes? I might not object if I understood the proposal better. I
got lost shortly after that point.
A minor point is that the beginning says, "we define what is a locally
visible and potentially visible name," whereas the term used later is
"potentially locally visible".
Side note: Gord has in 2217 the following example,
module m;
	import p::*;
	if (1) begin : s1
		initial begin
			s1.x = 1;  
and he wrote that at this point, "s1 is a directly visible scope name,"
which I did not like. This seems to conflict with Francoise's rules for
'locally visible' names, a term which I would assume should mean the
same as 'directly visible'.

SVDB 2037 ___Yes   _x_No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2037
Need to add BNF.

It says, "A hierarchical identifier in a parameter override shall be
resolved starting in the context of the configured instance."
Elsewhere in the LRM, identifiers in parameter overrides are resolved
from context of the instantiating scope, where the instantiation
statement appears, not from context of the instantiated scope.

Friendly amendments:
It should be in 32.4.3.
"predefined constant system function" should be "built-in constant
system function"
"WITDH" should be "WIDTH" a couple of times.

SVDB 2106 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2106
                         http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-bc/hm/7701.html
Need to merge in to previous proposal

SVDB 1602 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1602
SVDB 2097 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2097

Also subsequent proposals:
 
SVDB 1753 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1753
SVDB 1863 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1863
SVDB 1984 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1984
SVDB 2102 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2102
(Revision of current 2102)

Also close the following 

SVDB 1711 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=1711
SVDB 2211 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2221

Also
SVDB 2131 _x_Yes   ___No http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2131


Shalom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.