RE: Mantis 2593 about non-ANSI port declarations (Was: [sv-bc] Mantis 1111, omitting range on port declaration)

From: Steven Sharp <sharp_at_.....>
Date: Wed Apr 29 2009 - 13:51:02 PDT

I have uploaded a second revision of the proposal that uses "match" instead
of "be identical".

Steven Sharp
sharp@cadence.com


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Received on Wed Apr 29 13:53:53 2009

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Steven Sharp: "RE: Mantis 2593 about non-ANSI port declarations (Was: [sv-bc] Mantis 1111, omitting range on port declaration)"
Previous message: Bresticker, Shalom: "RE: Mantis 2593 about non-ANSI port declarations (Was: [sv-bc] Mantis 1111, omitting range on port declaration)"
Maybe in reply to: Brad Pierce: "Mantis 2593 about non-ANSI port declarations (Was: [sv-bc] Mantis 1111, omitting range on port declaration)"
Next in thread: Steven Sharp: "RE: Mantis 2593 about non-ANSI port declarations (Was: [sv-bc] Mantis 1111, omitting range on port declaration)"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ] [ By messages with attachments ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 29 2009 - 13:54:40 PDT