RE: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote (part 1) Closes 12am PST April 24th

Hi Neil,

Thanks for the input on 1655.
I made the changes in the two tables you noted (though their numbers
have changed in P1800-2008-draft2).

Regarding the use of "int unsigned" for weight, that was discussed
earlier on the reflector.  It was suggested to leave it as an int,
and forbid negative values.  This has a couple of benefits:
 - prevents accidental huge numbers when a signed variable with a
   negative value is assigned to "weight"
 - Gives tools an opportunity to issue an error for a nonsense value

The new proposal has been uploaded at
   http://www.verilog.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001655

The attachment is a filtered HTML page called SV-1655-1.htm.

Regards,
Doug


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
On Behalf Of Neil Korpusik
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 5:32 PM
> To: Mehdi Mohtashemi
> Cc: sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote (part 1) Closes 12am PST April 24th
> 
> 1655  ___ Yes   _X_ No
> 
> This mantis proposal overlaps with Mantis 1237. Doug has also flagged
this,
> but below I offer some additional input.
> 
> 1237 approved on 9/21/07 and has been incorporated into draft 1 of
1800-2008.
> 
> "The weight of each item, Wi, shall be a non-negative integral value."
> 
> This restriction should be specified in a different section. All of
the
> following should probably be modified.
> 
>    1. Sub-clause 18.6,   Table 18-13
>    2. Sub-clause 18.6.1, Table 18-15
>    3. Sub-clause 18.9, there are a few structs shown that should be
updated
>          struct {
>             int weight;   <---- change to 'int unsigned weight;'
>             ...
>          } option;
> 
> 
> Neil
> 
> 
> 
> Mehdi Mohtashemi wrote On 04/17/07 15:21,:
> >
> > Based on April 16th, 2007 sv-ec meeting, we are conducting an
> > email vote on the following mantis items.
> > 1655, 1732, 1777, 1371, 1384, 1707, 1680, 1427, 1723, 1736.
> > Part 2 of email vote will start next week.
> >
> > Please note that the operating guidelines are:
> > - Only one (1) week to respond (Midnight April 24th 2007)
> > - An issue passes if there are zero ** NO ** votes and at least
> >   half of the eligible voters respond with a YES vote.
> > - Any NO vote must be accompanied by a reason.
> >   This issue will then be up for discussion at the
> >   next conference call.
> >
> > As of the April 16th meeting, the eligible voters are (total 11):
> >
> > Arturo Salz,
> > Cliff Cummings
> > Dave Rich
> > Don Mills
> > Doug Warmke
> > Heath Chambers
> > Mark Hartoog
> > Michael Mintz
> > Neil Korpusik
> > Ray Ryan
> > Stu Sutherland
> >
> > Please mark your vote below by an x. If No, then specify a reason.
> > Send it to the reflector.
> >
> > 1655  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1732  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1777  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1371  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1384  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1707  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1680  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1427  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1723  ___ Yes   ___ No
> > 1736  ___ Yes   ___ No
> >
> 
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.


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