RE: [sv-ec] Transition bins of length 1 -> disallowed. New Mantis 1787

Thanks Shalom.

That was a good suggestion.
I uploaded a modified proposal.

Regards,
Doug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 12:26 AM
> To: Warmke, Doug; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Transition bins of length 1 -> disallowed. New
Mantis 1787
> 
> The current text indicates that what is numbered is the number of
> transitions, not the number of values. If you add additional text
which
> numbers the number of values, that becomes confusing. So why don't you
> take the same text you proposed, just changing 1 to 0, i.e.,
> "Transition bin specifications of length 0 are disallowed. These are
> transition bin specifications containing a trans_set production of a
> single range_value...".
> 
> Shalom
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
> > On Behalf Of Warmke, Doug
> > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 2:19 AM
> > To: sv-ec@server.eda.org
> > Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Transition bins of length 1 -> disallowed. New
> > Mantis 1787
> >
> > Hi Neil,
> >
> > This is a matter of language in what "single value transition"
means.
> >
> > By our terminology, what you are describing is a transition of
length
> > 2:
> > it has value1 followed by value2.
> >
> > What we are trying to avoid was transitions of length 1, with only
> > a single value -- thus the same as a state bin, not a transition
bin.
> >
> > I figure a little extra clarity can't hurt here.
> > Otherwise the user is left to infer the intention from that
> > solitary "value1 => value2" line in the LRM.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Doug
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Neil.Korpusik@Sun.COM [mailto:Neil.Korpusik@Sun.COM]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 3:20 PM
> > > To: Warmke, Doug
> > > Cc: sv-ec@eda.org
> > > Subject: Re: [sv-ec] Transition bins of length 1 -> disallowed.
New
> > Mantis 1787
> > >
> > > Hi Doug,
> > >
> > > Isn't this already covered by the following text in the current
LRM?
> > > From sub-clause 18.4.1
> > >
> > > "A trans_list specifies one or more sets of ordered value
> > transitions
> > of
> > > the coverage point. A single value transition is thus specified as
> > follows:"
> > >
> > >    value1 => value2
> > >
> > > Neil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Clause: 18.4.1
> > > >
> > > > At the end of Section 18.4.1, ADD the following new paragraph:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Transition bin specifications of length 1 are disallowed.  These
> > are
> > > > transition bin specifications containing a trans_set production
of
> > a
> > > > single range_value, e.g.,  "(0)" or "([0:1])", or a single
> > range_value
> > > > with a repeat_range evaluating to 1, e.g., "(0[*1])" or
> > "([0:1][*1])".
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Warmke, Doug wrote On 04/21/07 20:54,:
> > > > Hello SV-EC,
> > > >
> > > > I just entered a new Mantis with a simple proposal to disallow
> > > > transition bins with only one value (length 1).  That doesn't
> > really
> > > > make sense, since with only one value there is no transition
> > possible.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001787
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Doug
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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.