RE: [sv-ec] email ballot -- closes midnight October 7.2004

I believe 255 (SV-AC) is intended to replace 238,240.

Is this correct?

- Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Mehdi Mohtashemi
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 11:52 PM
> To: sv-ec@eda.org
> Subject: [sv-ec] email ballot -- closes midnight October 7.2004
> Importance: High
>
> Hi,
> Here is the list of errata items to be voted by email. Please
> email your votes as soon as you can, before October 7, we
> need to create the document for P1800 meeting (October 11th)
> by Friday October 8th 2004.
> Regards,
> - Mehdi
>
> ==============================================================
> ==============
> ========
> Please respond to the following votes, mark X where
> appropriate, and place explanation for No vote. This is to
> approve the change proposal for each errata as indicated in
> the bug data base (or sent via email) updated after September
> 27th, 2004 meeting.
>
> Errata
> 7 Clarification to 20.4.1, new 20.10
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 8 Randsequence grammar issues
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 173 Is the order of declaration in a covergroup
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 197 Is a String an array
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 203 Section 3.7, delete the sentence "and embedded null bytes are
> included"
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 231 Clarify the second paragraph in Section 16.5
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 236 Behavior of the cycle_delay with 'Zero' value
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 238 Pipelined value access in clocking block
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> 240 Expression evaluation with cycle_delay
> ____ Yes ____ No
>
> ==============================================================
> ==============
> ==
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Oct 1 12:49:20 2004