Mehdi Mohtashemi wrote: > > 885 _X_ Yes ___ No CLOSE 885, covered by 339 > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000885 > > 1384 ___ Yes _X_ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001384 I agree with Arturo and Mark that "superclass" is what is intended. "base class" might be another alternative. I think the wording was picked up from other wording in 8.12: ... new subclass that inherits the members of the parent class and ...each class is derived from a single parent class. We really should change all of those references to "base class" or "superclass" to be consistent. Certainly nested classes don't inherit from a parent class due to an extends. > 1609 _X_ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001609 > 1715 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001715 I'm going to abstain on 1715. > 1723 _X_ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001723 > > 1851 ___ Yes _X_ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001851 I agree with others -- a "local parameter" is different than a "localparam". If this text changes to "localparam" I'm Ok with the rest. > 2021 _X_ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002021 > > 2055 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002055 I'll abstain on 2055. This really needs to be user driven and I don't have feedback to provide on that side. > 2113 ___ Yes _X_ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002113 Agree with previous concerns. > 2137 _X_ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002137 -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Thu Oct 25 15:31:46 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 25 2007 - 15:31:55 PDT