RE: [sv-ec] proposal for erratum 236

 
Yes, I think it is unclear.
The current wording seem to imply that the "contnue" behaviour also applies
any delay.
It think that we should say it applies to any delay value which evaluated to
0.
For ex: ##(j-1) where j is 1.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org] On Behalf Of Ryan,
Ray
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 3:03 PM
To: sv-ec@eda.org; Surrendra Dudani
Subject: RE: [sv-ec] proposal for erratum 236

 Surrendra,

I would like to add a friendly ammendment to you proposal to make clear that
the clarification applies to zero cycle delay.

I recommend changing your sentence,

 "When the program execution reaches a cycle delay statement, the execution
continues if there is a clocking event."

TO

 "When the program execution reaches a zero cycle delay statement, the
execution continues if there is a clocking event."

Also, the proposal needs to be added to the errata in the Mantis database.

Thanks,
Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Surrendra Dudani
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 1:52 PM
> To: sv-ec@eda.org
> Subject: [sv-ec] proposal for erratum 236
>
> Attached is the proposal for erratum #236.
> Surrendra
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> Surrendra A. Dudani
> Synopsys, Inc.
> 377 Simarano Drive, Suite 300
> Marlboro, MA 01752
>
> Tel: 508-263-8072
> Fax: 508-263-8123
> email: Surrendra.Dudani@synopsys.com
> **********************************************
>
Received on Fri Oct 1 14:41:50 2004