RE: [sv-ec]e-mail ballot Closes Wednesday February 20 2008, 11:59pm PST

From: Arturo Salz <Arturo.Salz_at_.....>
Date: Wed Feb 20 2008 - 17:26:29 PST
Here are my votes.

 

2088  ___ Yes   __X_ No  

http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2088    

 

The proposal allows covergroup declarations but not type declarations -
this seems inconsistent.

The proposal suggests that each checker instance does not create a
different covergroup type or object, which is inconsistent with all
other structural constructs. If indeed covergroup types and objects are
singleton objects (one per checker declaration) then this should be
explicitly stated.

 

 2089  ___ Yes   __X_ No  

http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2089   

 

It is not clear how many final procedures are executed per checker
instantiation - one per checker instance or one per checker declaration.

 

In general, checkers seems strange. They are structural constructs that
may be instantiated inside procedural code where no other structural
component may be instantiated, but they are also considerable limiting
since they may contain only a few constructs. 

 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Wed Feb 20 17:30:36 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 20 2008 - 17:31:17 PST