Re: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote: Closes 12am PST October 10th 2007

From: Neil Korpusik <Neil.Korpusik_at_.....>
Date: Wed Oct 10 2007 - 18:59:29 PDT
My votes are below.

Neil




 339  yes
1336   no

  I will change my vote to yes if the following changes are made.

  1. There appears to be something wrong with the sentence added to 9.3.2

     From:
        Use restricted inside function calls (See 13.4) Functions
      To:
        Has restricted usage inside function calls (See 13.4).

  2. Section 13.4.4

     Brad offered the following suggestion. This would make this change
     consistent with the line immediately above it.

       From:
          A constant function shall not have any fork constructs.
         To:
          A constant function shall not contain any fork constructs.

  3. Section 13.4.5

      From:
         From within a function, a fork-join_none construct may contain any
         statements that are legal from within a task.
        To:
         Within a function, a fork-join_none construct may contain any
         statements that are legal within a task.

1384  yes
1560   no

   I will change my vote to yes if this one change is removed from the proposal.

   Why change the word prototype to syntax?
      All of the Queue methods described in 7.11.2 mention the word prototype.
      Why is it being changed to syntax for just the delete method?

1594 yes, with the following friendly ammendments

   Two minor word-smithing problems:
      1) operand   --> operands
      2) wild card --> wildcard

    From:
       The logical equality (or case equality) operator is a legal operation if
       either operand is a class object or the literal null and one of the
       operand is...
      To:
       The logical equality (or case equality) operator is a legal operation if
       either operand is a class object or the literal null and one of the
       operands is...

    From:
       wild card
      To:
       wildcard

1608 no

    section 8.4

    There is something wrong with this sentence

       "Assignment of a class object which class datatype is assignment
        compatible with the target class object"

    Something like the following seems more correct:
        Assignment of a class object which is datatype assignment compatible
        with the target class object

1615 yes - agree to close (covered by 1336)
1679 yes
1715 yes

   Minor correction:
     I think that the reference to clause 15 should actually be to 15.5.

1871 yes
1897 yes
1928 yes

     If none of John's comments are incorporated into 1928 we should open a
     new mantis item to address John's feedback.

2007 yes




Mehdi Mohtashemi wrote On 10/02/07 08:17 PM,:
> Hi,
> Based on October 1 2007 sv-ec meeting, we are conducting 
> an email vote on the following mantis items:
> 
>  339  1336  1384  1560  1594  1608  1615  1679  1715  1871  1897  1928
> 2007
> 
> Operating guidelines for sv-ec email vote:
> - Only one (1) week to respond (Midnight October 10 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.
> - Please indicate any friendly amendment that you think will change
>   your vote to a YES, this will help with completing our task.
> 
> - Notes: 
>   * 1615: the vote for mantis item 1615 is to close it, covered by 1336.
>   * 1928: re-approve. If needed sv-ec can open another mantis item
> 
> As of the October 1 2007 meeting, the eligible voters are (total 15):
> 
> Arturo Salz,
> Cliff Cummings         
> Dave Rich           
> Francoise Martinolle
> Gordon Vreugdenhil
> Neil Korpusik      
> Ray Ryan
> Steven Sharp
> Stu Sutherland 
> Heath Chambers
> Don Mills
> Mark Hartoog
> Geoffrey Coram    
> David Scott     
> Mike Burns
> 
> 
> Please mark your vote below by an x. If No, then specify a reason. 
> Send it to the reflector.
> 
> 339  ___ Yes   ___ No     
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000339        
> 
> 1336  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001336        
> 
> 1384  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001384        
> 
> 1560  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001560        
> 
> 1594  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001594        
> 
> 1608  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001608        
> 
> 1615  ___ Yes   ___ No    CLOSE 1615, covered by 1336
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001615        
> 
> 1679  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001679        
> 
> 1715  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001715        
> 
> 1871  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001871        
> 
> 1897  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001897        
> 
> 1928  ___ Yes   ___ No    Re-approve. If needed open other mantis
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001928        
> 
> 2007  ___ Yes   ___ No  
> http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002007        
> 
> 
> 
>  339   typos in queue methods
> 1336   Rules for allowed statements in a function
> 1384   bit stream cast and pack/unpack for protected./local members
> 1560   Queue delete() method for entire array 
> 1594  conditional operator for class handles incorrect
> 1608  equality, inequality and conditional operator rules for class
> handles
> 1615   can processes spawned by functions execute blocking statements?
> 1679   string casting statement unclear 
> 1715   Triggered property of a clocking block 
> 1871   clarification needed for illegal/ignore transition bins
> 1897   clarify "union of all significant bins" and "overlapping bins" in
> coverage computation 
> 1928   clarification of coverpoint value resolution (18.5.6)
> 2007   7.9.4: rules about int type index for associative arrays
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Korpusik                                     Tel: 408-276-6385
Frontend Technologies (FTAP)                      Fax: 408-276-5092
Sun Microsystems                       email: neil.korpusik@sun.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Wed Oct 10 19:00:07 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 10 2007 - 19:00:28 PDT