Subject: [sv-ec] Minutes from 2 February 2004 Meeting
From: David W. Smith (dwsmith@synopsys.com)
Date: Tue Feb 03 2004 - 07:48:49 PST
Greetings,
The minutes for yesterday's meeting have been posted to the web site and are attached.
Regards
David
SV-EC Meeting Minutes
2 February 2004 9:00 am. Wednesday
(rrrrrrrrrrxrxrxrrrrr)
Voting Members (3/4 or > 75%)
(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) Arturo Salz (Synopsys)
(-aaaaaaaaaaaa-aaaa-a) Brad Pierce (Synopsys)
(aaaaa-aaaa-aaaaaaa-a) Dave Rich (Synopsys)
(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) David Smith (Synopsys)
(-aaa-aaa-a-aap-p-aa-) Dennis Brophy (ModelTech)
(aaaaapaaaaaa-aaaaa-a) Jay Lawrence (Cadence)
(aaa-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) Michael Burns (Motorola)
(-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) Mehdi Mohtashemi (Synopsys)
(aa-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) Neil Korpusik (Sun)
(--aaaaaaaaaaaaa--aaa) Ray Ryan (ModelTech)
||||||||||||||||||||_ 2 February
|||||||||||||||||||__ 21 January
||||||||||||||||||___ 5 January
|||||||||||||||||____ 15 December
||||||||||||||||_____ 8 December
|||||||||||||||______ 1 December
||||||||||||||_______ 24 November
|||||||||||||________ 17 November
||||||||||||_________ 11 November
|||||||||||__________ 3 November
||||||||||___________ 27 October
|||||||||____________ 20 October
||||||||_____________ 13 October
|||||||______________ 29 September
||||||_______________ 15 September
|||||________________ 2 September
||||_________________ 18 Aug
|||__________________ 4 Aug
||___________________ 21 July
|____________________ 7 July
Non-Voting Members (attendance based)
(------a-------------) Chris Spear (Synopsys)
(--aaaa-aaa---a-aaa--) Cliff Cummings (IEEE 1364)
(-------------s-s----) Doug Warmke (ModelTech)
(-----s--------------) Francoise Martinolle (Cadence)
(--a-aaa-a-----------) Jeff Freedman (ModelTech)
(-----------a--------) Peter Flake
(---------------a----) Ron Goodstein (First Shot Logic Simulation and Design)
(---a-----------aa--a) Stefen Boyd (IEEE 1364)
(-a---a----------aa--) Stu Sutherland (IEEE 1364)
Guests (non-voting)
(--a-a-a----------a--) Don Mills (LCDM Engineering)
(-----a--------------) James Young (HP)
(-a------------------) Kevin Cameron (National)
r => Regular meeting
x => Extra meeting (Presence counts for attendance, absence does not)
a => Attended
p => Attended by proxy
s => Attended as proxy
- => Missed
Action Items:
[identified with AI (#) in this text, # refers to AI number]
Added this week (please see the site for existing action items):
AI-55 (Neil): Review cross references for accuracy
AI-56 (Brad): Review cross references for accuracy
AI-57 (Ray/Brad): Deal with randomize statement BNF
Minutes 2/2/04 taken by Mehdi Mohtashemi
1. Review of the meeting minutes
http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC-Minutes-2004-January-21.txt
Motion: Accept Minutes of 21 January
Moved: Neil
Second: Arturo
Abstain: Brad (not read)
Opposed: None
Passed
2. Review of open Action Items
All closed
3. Review of Inter-committee dependencies
All closed
4. Review Errata list
David: New items, 5 LRM erratas thad did not go throug the committee,
need to make sure they are ok. From Vassilios email, erratta being
editorial, no need to go through committee process. They are all open,
purely editorial nature. The others are change of content and need
more discussion before they get into the LRM. The chairs would make
that decision. Any thing that does not get into the LRM will be in
errata.
Proposals:
LRM-191:
Neil will review in Draft 4
LRM-192
Brad will review in Draft 4
LRM-193
Change to remove process from static.
Michael: We should include class members in the paragraph.
David: In 5.5, Dave suggested to remove in the process in that
paragraph.
Michael: Is this in new draft LRM?
Neil: Down at the bottom.
David: If you download draft4.
Michael: Do we mention it here that member function and tasks are
automatic functions or tasks.
David: First question is: applies to member functions and tasks.
The second question is do we need to clarify for automatic.
Michael: Maybe we can say in (automatic )
Jay: Are tasks and functions automatic by default?
David: Yes it is, even if it is, there is another section detailing
the default behaviour.
Michael: With always initial, do you mean names?
Jay: You can creat automatic variables there now.
David: Any scope is automatic by some mechanism. Scope is local to the
block, any block. Instead of having to enumerate all, is there a
generic term.
Dave: Functions/tasks are the only place where you can declare
scope to be automtic.
Brad: Modules and interfaces too.
Dave: No, in modules have to be non-automatic.
Jay: For always/initial blocks what is the use of it.
Arturo: We can declare a module to have automatic life, with LRM
correction on that. I think it was Dave who suggested that.
Dave: What if we say, ...in a automatic block such as a tasks/functions.
Michael: To enumerate all the automatic scopes here would not be
necessary.
Arturo: This is an informative section.
David: 5.5 is not informative section.
Data declared to be static in automatic block, such as a
task/function, has scope of life-time staitic life-time in the
scope of block.
Jay: You are inventing a new term, automatic block.
David: Ok how about:
Data declared to be static in an automatic task, function, or block
has a static lifetime and a scope local to the block.
Motion: Accept change as modified above.
Moved: Dave
Second: Michael
Abstain: None
Opposed: None
Passed
LRM-195
Arturo: The definition of semantics of pass by reference was removed
somehow, it should not have been deleted.
Neil: Is it undoing LRM-111?
David: No, it is applying it correctly.
Motion: Accept change
Moved: Arturo
Second: Neil
Abstain: None
Opposed: None
Passed
LRM_199
Motion: Accept change in LRM-199
Moved: Arturo
Second: Mehdi
Abstain: None
Opposed: None
Passed
David: 3 issues come from the email reflector that we need to discuss.
Unused production range_list_or_array in BNF (from Ray Ryan)
Accepted without objection
LRM syntax for calls to randomize
David:
There was a question from Ray, on randomize, two different places
with two different rules.
Arturo: I think there was some confusion for the use of "with",
one in randomize and one on the array randomization.
Ray: I was looking at 12.5.1, randomize is pre-defined method.
Syntactically they do match up. In the way LRM is shown, it looks
like a blocking assignment. Randomize returns a value 0/1. You
cannot use if (randomize...), because we are making randomize
a statement, why can we not make it a method call.
Arturo: Yes, i guess we can do this. Brad do you have any comments.
Brad: It should be an expression?
Ray: In 8.2, there is the rule for method call. makes it easier,
pulls the two with in there makes it clear. with {}, with (),
class, and array.
Brad: The first thing was to remove randomize from blocking
assignemnt, three places. Should we change method call to say,
any expression or class-variable identifier.
Arturo: It should be any expression.
Ray: That part is optional, looking at scope for randomize productions.
David: Can I make a suggestion to take it off-line, discuss it on the
reflector, propose a solution, and we can vote on it.
Unpacked arrays fixed and dynamic
David: The last one is the issue of packed-array form Johnattan.
Do you still want to make the change that you proposed.
Informative change in 4.1, deletion in 4.2, and some change in 4.6.
Dave: Deletion in 4.2 is moved into 4.1, updated to deal with queues,
and text being one-dimensional was not right.
David: Jonattan's suggestion did nothing to change the intent?
Dave: He was trying to find better wordings.
Neil: Not that he disagreed with you,
Dave: No, he did not make any other suggestions either.
Motion: Accept change as documented in email
Moved: Dave
Second: Arturo
Abstain: None
Opposed: None
Passed
5. LRM Review
Summary and Assignments:
Glossary
Dave - in progress
Verification of all cross references
Sections 1-7: Ray - in progress
Sections 8-14: Stu
Sections 15-21: Neil - in Draft 4
Sections 21-29: Brad - in Draft 4
Check all changes for consistency and correctness
Assertions - Michael - in progress
Semantic simularities with Assertions being found.
C API -
Classes/Randomization - Mehdi - in progress
Constraints - Arturo - in progress
Types - Dave - in progress
6. Review 3.1a Extensions and discussion
All closed
7. Meeting Logistics
Next meeting scheduled for 18 February 2004 from 10:00am until 12:00pm
Focus on editorial review and any open errata.
8. Next Meeting
Monday February 18, 2004, 10:00am-12:00 pm PST
9. Meeting adjourned at: 11:45 am.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Feb 03 2004 - 08:00:20 PST