SV-EC Ballot resolution committee meeting. Monday April 13 2009 11:00am - 1:00pm PDT Monday April 20 2009 11:00am - 1:00pm PDT This is the combined minutes of April 13 2009 and is the continuation on April 20 2009: [ http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_April_13_and_20_2009_Minutes_combined.txt ] The notes from April.20.2009 are indicated with the following header: Apr20: Meeting number: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00 00 11 Meeting Days: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (12 ) Day (30 ) (00 ) Month (44) (00 ) Year (99 ) ------ Attendees -------------------------------------------------------- (A-) Arturo Salz 1 (A-) Cliff Cummings 1 (AA) Dave Rich 1 (AA) Francoise Martinolle 1 (AA) Mehdi Mohtashemi 1 (AA) Neil Korpusik 1 (AA) Ray Ryan 1 (-A) Gordon Vreugdenhil 0 (AA) Steven Sharp 1 (--) Doug Warmke 0 (A-) Stu Sutherland 1 (AA) Heath Chambers 1 (AA) Don Mills 1 (AA) Jonathan Bromley 1 (AA) Mark Hartoog 1 (AA) Tom Alsop 1 (--) Satia (Intel) 0 (--) Rob Slater 0 (--) Alex Gran - Mentor 0 (A-) Mike Mintz 0 (--) Geoffrey Coram 0 (AA) David Scott 1 (--) Benjamin Chen 0 (--) Mike Burns 0 On April 13 2009, voting rights Were reset. 16 joined for the first call on April 13 2009. 13 joined for the second call on April 20 2009. ** Minutes taken by Neil Korpusik and Mehdi Mohtashemi ////////////////// April 13 & 20 2009 ///////////////////////// There was some discussion about the amount of notice that people received before this meeting (11 days). The following was decided: - Everyone is allowed to vote today. - The 2 out of 3 meeting tracking will apply starting at the next meeting planned for April 27 2009. Agenda: 1. Review IEEE patent policy ref: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Move: Stu - assume patent policy was read Second: Dave Abstain: None Opposed: None Approved 2. Review meeting minutes/notes: July 21 2008 meeting minutes http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_July_21_2008_Minutes.txt Dave - thinks this is a new committee meeting. Francoise - in the sv-cc they reviewed their previous meeting minutes. Move: Cliff - approve the meeting minutes of July 21 2008 Second: Heath Abstain: Steven Opposed: None Approved with one abstain 3. Updates from p1800WG / ------------------------------------------------------ The P1800 Will be meeting this Thursday April 16th. Cliff - in svbc, some items were flagged as trivial, people took AI's for proposals, some items will be flagged as "out of scope". 3.1: Ballot resolution for March 2009 p1800 Ballot. [From Karen Pieper email] The Ballot Comments from the March 2009 P1800 Ballot can be found at: http://www.eda.org/twiki/bin/view.cgi/P1800/P1800BallotReviewFeedback Because this is twiki, we can update this file and work on it. Our next step is to look over the ballot feedback for each committee, and report back to the P1800 by 4/16 as to how long each committee thinks they require to address the feedback. The current target is May 14, 2009. AI; Mehdi - conduct an email vote on the trivial items. [Some may require proposals to become ready] Mehdi: Gord had sent an email to the reflector regarding some sv-ec ballot issues he wanted to follow-up. Those were rows: 149, 150, 151, 152, 160, 163-166 From Shalom's version of the spreadsheet: (was attached to today's agenda email) The set of sv-ec items begin on line 125 of the spreadsheet. Apr20: ------ Neil - reviewed the Working Group feedback. - We should try to get done by May 14th. rows 125-127 - id 16, 17, 19 Francoise - from sv-cc: these PLI regions should remain - may have a future use. Cliff - thinks we should keep them Arturo , Stu - also agreed Jonathan - may need to update figure in line 127. 125, 126 - sv-ec agrees with sv-cc resolution to keep these regions for possible future use 127 - sv-ec thinks there is no action required. Apr20: this item is ready for an email vote. row 128 - id 20 Steven - he added this comment, and thinks it should be updated. Arturo - which queue is being referred to? Steven - the active queue, is what it is talking about AI: Steven - row 128, id 20; put together a proposal, mantis 2634 Apr20: Steven - thinks it might be best for svbc Mehdi - put into an email vote and send to svbc row 130, id 21: row 130 -- is a string a singlular or aggregate data type? Steven - not sure if he knows the answer on this one. Mehdi - we can not do anything without a proposal. AI: Steven - row 130, id 21, will gather some input on this. Apr20: Steven: not done yet, expects to have some more feedback by next week. row 131 - id 184, bit-stream cast to destination class must be constructed or made illegal Dave - would like to make it illegal, LRM talks about class as a source Neil - thought that we already made this illeagal. Dave - couldn't find any text stating that. AI: Dave - row 131, id 184; put together a proposal. Apr20: Dave - will hopefully have a proposal for next week. row 132 - id 30, row 133 - id 31, same issue Jonathan - sounds like a trivial and reasonable change. Arturo - it should say 'integral' AI: Arturo - row 132, 133, id 30 & 31; write it up, both 132 and 133 Apr20: No Arturo in today's meeting. 134 - Dave - it is trivial Cliff - not required and low priority Stu - the spreadsheet has an example to add. AI: Stu - row 134, id 35; writeup a proposal Apr20: Jonathan: mantis 2705 Mehdi: this would be ready for an email vote. 135 - id 36 136 - id 37 137 - id 38 138 - id 39 139 - id 40 Steven - only the first one is a real problem - note, we now have a type of type "type" Jonathan - can't assign to a type. "a variable of type string" AI: Jonathan - combine rows 135-139 [ids: 36-40] into one mantis item. Apr20: Jonathan - mantis 2700 (2707 another issues found while doing proposal) 140 - id 186, mantis 2288 Dave - add to an email ballot. AI: Dave - row 140, id 186; put together a proposal. Apr20: Dave - hopefully by next week - should be easy 141 - id 43, wildcard Jonathan - this is a valid fix AI: Dave - row 141, id 43; put together a proposal for this Apr20: Dave - it should be simple 142 - id 44 Jonathan - trivial. no track record for assinging error Steven - would expect consistency between assigning one versus assigned together. This comment was with regards to issuing of an error message. AI: Jonathan - row 142, id 44; will put together a proposal. Apr20: Jonathan - Mantis 2701 143 - id 188, order for find and find_index, mantis 1721 Dave - it should be trivial to define AI: Dave - row 143, id 188; will look into 141, 144 144 - id 45, combine with line 141 AI: Dave - row 144, id 45; combine this with row 141, id 43 145 - id 46 Stu - We can just remove that one sentence about "..convention" AI: Stu - row 145, id 46; will write a proposal Apr20: Jonathan - mantis 2706 is now ready (from Stu) 146 - id 47 Steven - it is unpredictable. Doesn't agree with the comment. Arturo - dereferencing a null c pointer - is an error Francoise - table says it is "not allowed" (Table 8.1) Arturo - section 8.4 - says it is illegal. - we should make all places in the LRM consistent. Jonathan - why are we comparing to C anyway? section 8.4 Mehdi - one proposal is to remove the table, or make it a note. * Marked as non-trivial, Francoise will follow-up. Apr20: ------ Neil - last time we discussed making all things consistent in this section Gord - undefined in SystemVerilog Francoise - if illegal doesn't that mean we should raise an error somehow? Gord - it explicitly says that it is indeterminate (near beginning , after example) Jonathan - what does "illegal" mean? - that paragraph in 8.4 seems to be internally self-contradictory. Mark - what are the tool options? Could be an out of range reference. Steven - it could also change code that will be executed. - in C typically you get a seg fault. Steven - changing the language rules is beyond scope, best to just do a rewording of the table. Neil - the table entry should say undefined then? Steven - yes. Gord - for C, not sure if c lrm says error. Jonathan - doesn't think the table is that helpful. Steven - changing the text is not part of ballot review. Jonathan - the "not allowed" entries in the table are mostly compiler errors. Steven - changing to "error" is ok, and add a reference to the paragraph. - not really different from C AI: Steven - create a proposal for updating the table. 147 - id 181, mantis 2035 Francoise - Dave's mantis item Dave - causes user confusion. Arturo - may be a fair amount of work to change the BNF Steven - they were there in an earlier version of the standard AI: Dave - row 147, id 181; follow-up on thisfor now Apr20: Dave - will require more discussion 148 - id 48 Steven - assumes it should be allowed - will take some work Arturo - we could live with the restrictive version for now * Reviewed; Leave for future enhancement... Apr20: AI:Mehdi - add to an email vote, one of the canned responses should work. 149 - id 49 Arturo - Gord wanted it to be more like the c-style steven - we will most likely have differences of opinion, without a "killer example" that makes it more obvious. AI: Gord - row 149, id 49 [not here, but on his list to discuss/review] Apr20: ------ Gord - expects there to be a lot of discussion. - there are 3 options 1. don't address it - not a good outcome 2. say what it is suppose to do and just vote on it 3. the sequencing is undefined - huge barriers on how write code certain construction activities become problematic. Mark - expects some users to be unahppy no matter what Steven - there may be use models that would lean either way. Gord - the proposal itself shouldn't be hard to write. AI: Francoise - will add and email link to the mantis item. 150 - id 50, mantis 2575 Arturo - this one is fairly clear. Francoise - there are more issues listed in the mantis item Arturo - not a huge item, may require discussion AI: Francoise - row 150, id 50; will follow-up for now Apr20: ------- Francoise: we need some discussion before writing a proposal. Gord - if not a data item, I don't know what it is. Mark - a static data member of the class? Gord - if a class static data member. class_name::parameter_name is a constant expression. class_handle.paramater_name <-- not constant Steven - the text leads him to believe that these are not members of the class. Thinks it is however fine to make them members. Francoise - class_scope:: can be in a constant expression context this. can't be in a constant expression context handle_name. can't be in a constant expression context - can be accessed with super? Gord - yes - clearly "." can be used to access type parameters. - in a cg - the cg chapter where discusses embedded cg has some text David - typename of cg used as an instance. Gord - it sounds like there is good consensus on these points. AI: Steven - will track down what text he thinks needs to be changed so that we can think of these as class members. AI: Francoise - will have a proposal by next meeting. 151 - id 51, using super in constructor Stu - it is not an editorial issue Arturo - there were still some issues with initializers, etc. AI: Francoise & Gord - row 151, id 51; will follow-up for now Apr20: --------- Francoise - this text is not clear. - wasn't clear what the text meant. Steven - super.new is what he thought it was referring to - says that super.new will be called first by default, not saying that user must code it. Gord - what about using super.xx or super.yy as an argument to new? - local variable initialization is still a question. int x = super.y Neil - agrees with Gord about the variable initialization sequence Gord - what gets initilized when, is a mess right now. - we should come up with a definite direction on this. AI: Arturo - take a look at this one (and line 152 id 52) 152 - id 52, Put it together with row 151, id 51. Mark - thinks this one should be easy AI: Francoise - row 152, id 52; will follow-up Apr20: ------ Mark - mantis 2598 doesn't seem to be the right one for this point Francoise - I may have referenced the wrong one. AI: Francoise - add to mantis 2575 (line 150, id 50) 153 -id 67, mantis 2358 Francoise - related to 149 Arturo - should be easy to resolve AI: Francoise - row 153, id 67; will look at it. Apr20: ------- Gord - was asking about default with arguments versus explicit call. - ok with a statement saying the explicit one wins. - extends clause and an expicit super.new() - only one constructor is allowed per class today AI: Mark - write up a proposal 154 - id 53 Francoise - thinks there should be a rewording. AI: Francoise - row 154, id 53; will follow-up. Apr20: ------ Steven - something needs to state the default Tom - there is a sentence on page 135. Francoise - that sentence can be moved to the beginning of this section. Tom - data versus propoerties. AI: Francoise - write a proposal to move that one sentence earlier in this section. 155 - id 54 Arturo - we will need to discuss it Neil - it is stated as being an enhancement Mark - clearly an enhancement * row 155, id 54 An enhancement 156 - id 55 Steven - they are at least static Dave - is this.parameter_name a valid reference? Arturo - today can refer to a type this way Mark - should be ok in a procedural expression. Steven - thinks the answer is yes. AI: Francoise - row 156, id 55; will follow-up, non-trvial Apr20: -------- Steven - class parameters are class members (?) Gord - agreed Jonathan - add to 2575 Tom - was talking about adding a new clause. Gord - "class members are identified as either local or protected" This is part of section 8.17 near the end. - section 8.22 doesn't list constraints, parameters or type parameters. (page 139 near top) Francoise - mantis 2608 Gord - if we call them properites, it could impact bit-packing operations Steven - there is a lot of risk in referring to them as properties. Tom - should we say that they aren't properties? Gord - believes that they are members. Steven - only properties or methods are members. - it doesn't matter where they are declared... - would be safter to say can reference them but not actually properties 157 - id 57 Cliff - it is trivial AI: Cliff - row 157, id 57; put together a proposal 158 - id 182, mantis 2514 Arturo - an enhancement but trivial Dave - had some comments AI: Dave - row 158, id 182; follow-up, proposal, maybe trivial. Apr20: AI: Jonathan - will take a look at it. 159 - id 58 Dave - editorial issue Jonathan - agreed Stu - may not even need a mantis item. AI: Mehdi - row 159, id 58; editoral, assign to editor. 160 - id 59, AI: Gord - row 160, id 59; related to id 50. 161 - id 60 Steven - Editorial AI: Mehdi - row 160, id 60; editoral, assign to editor 162 - id 61 Francoise - editorial AI: Mehdi - row 162, id 61; editoral, assign to editor 163 - id 62 Francoise - out of block declaration Mark - thinks it could be resolved by May 14th. 164, id 63 - 165, id 64 - 166, id 65 - all related. AI: Gord, & Francoise - rows 163-166, id [59-62]; to follow-up. Apr20: ------- Gord - wanted to read over everything to ensure everything is covered. - example 2 in the mantis item is a bit nasty - thinks that the comment in the Manits item is not correct. Thinks it binds differently than mentioned in the mantis. Mark - thinks that example should be an error. 167 - id 183 Dave - clocking block issues, thinks it is trivial - no proposal yet AI: Dave - row 167, id 183; follow-up, non-trivial Apr20: AI: Mehdi - add to the email vote. 168 - id 80 Jonathan - a proposal already exists. - Mantis 890 wording didn't match the consensus. AI: Mehdi - row 168, id 80; proposal exists, add to email vote 169 - id 81 Arturo - would be more complicated to define it than to leave it alone. AI: Mehdi - row 169, id 81; send to sv-ac; sv-ec has no change to recommend. 170 - id 101 AI: Mehdi - row 170, id 101; send to sv-ac 171 - id 102 Mehdi - editorial? Stu - it appears to be. AI: Ray - row 171, id 102; put together a proposal Apr20: Ray: that should be a simple change. 172 - id 189 AI: Dave - row 172, id 102; follow-up, nontrivial 173 - id 190 AI: Dave - row 173, id 190; follow-up, nontrivial 174 - id 104 David SCott - this appears to be editorial Stu - assign it to the editor AI: Mehdi - row 174, id 104; assign to editor. 175 - id 105 David S. - not sure why nets and wires need to be mentioned. Dave - passing by ref might be the issue. Francoise - we can't do coverage of wires, it appears Steven - a wire is an expression. Stu - the wording could cause problems. Dave - see Mantis 1575 AI: David Scott - row 175, id 105, follow-up, non-trivial Apr20: David - I won't be able to look at anything until Thursday. - I can try to get his done, but not sure yet. 176 - id 106 David - the answer is "nothing" AI: David Scott - row 176, id 106, follow-up, maybe trivial 177 - id 107 David - this is actually an ambiguous situation - he would like this to be true AI: David Scott - row 177, id 107, follow-up, non-trivial 178 - 108 Stu - editorial AI: Mehdi - row 178, id 108; assign to editor. 179 - 109 Arturo - expects this to be trivial, unless we don't understand it Jonathan - blocking event triggering issue? AI: Francoise - row 179, id 109; try to get more information 180 - 110 Dup of 175, id 105 AI: David - row 180, id 110; make sure it is a duplicate 181 - id 111 David S. - this would add another wierd special case. Neil - an enhancement request Don - spreadsheet doesn't say it must be addressed Steven - backward compatability issue if we make the change AI: Francoise - row 181, id 111; get more clarification. David & Arturo to help. 182 - id 112 David - editorial AI: Mehdi - row 182, id 112, assign to editor 183 - id 113 David - it appears to be editorial AI: David - row 183, id 113, follow-up, trivial. 184 - id 114 David - this section tends to not define terms well, but he thought that this sentence was clear, in context. Arturo - state bins not defined (they are those bins that are transitions) David - he is inclined to not fix it. Arturo - maybe just removing the word "state" would work. AI: Arturo - row 184, id 114, put a proposal together; non-trivial there will be other places that would need to be touched 185 - id 115 Arturo - no fix is required... Doesn't understand the problem David - understands the paragraph AI: Mehdi - row 185, id 115; no change needed 186 - id 116 David S. - will require changes AI: David, Gord - row 186, id 116; follow-up. non-trivial 187 - id 117 Arturo - editorial AI: Mehdi - row 187, id 117; assign to editor 188 - id 118 Clif - editorial AI: Mehdi - ro2 188, id 118; assign to editor 189 - id 119 Arturo - editorial AI: Mehdi - ro2 189, id 119; assign to editor 190 - id 121 AI: David - row 190, id 121; follow-up, non-trivial. 191 - id 122 AI: Mehdi - row 191, id 122; assign to editor 192 - id 120 Arturo - doesn't understand the comment AI: Arturo - row 192, id 120, follow-up, non-trivial. 193 - id 134 AI: Mehdi - row 193, id 134; send it to the sv-bc 194 - id 135 AI: Mehdi - row 194, id 135; send it to the sv-bc (duplicate of id 134) 195 - id 137 AI: Mehdi - row 195, id 137; assign to editor 196 - id 185 Dave - a semantic note or a bnf change is required Arturo - Assumes there is wide cosensus on this one. AI: Dave - row 196, id 185; follow-up, trivial. 197 - id 192 - deprecate the linked list package Mehdi - we should take a look at it. AI: Dave - row 197, id 192; follow-up, non-trivial. Issues that may not be trivial: row number, id number 1. 130 21 2. 143 188 3. 146 47 4. 147 181 5. 149 49 - expect it to have a difference of opinion 6. 150 50 7. 151 51 8. 156 55 - requires some discussion 9. 167 183 10. 172 189 11. 173 190 12. 175 105 13. 177 107 14. 181 111 15. 184 114 16. 186 116 17. 190 121 18. 192 120 19. 197 192 NOTE: -------- All proposals need to be in Mantis, except for purely Editorial issues. Reference the line and id number from the spreadsheet. 4. Next meetings in 2009 --------------------------------- With respect to today's meeting and the number of issues to review, suggested to have weekly calls. Move: Don made the proposal to suspend today's meeting and resume next week. Second: Neil Abstain: none Opposed: none approved, Monday April 20 2009 11:00-1:00pm Monday April 27 2009 11:00-1:00pm Weekly meetings after that MOnday May 4 2009 11:00-1:00pm Monday May 11 2009 11:00-1:00pm === action items list below is provided for members reference === not part of official sv-ec meeting minutes ================= Action item list provided for sv-ec =================== ============ from April 20 2009 continuation meeting =================== AI: Steven - row 146 id 47 create a proposal for updating the table. AI: Mehdi - row 148 id 48 add to an email vote, one of the canned responses should work. AI: Francoise - row 149 id 49 will add and email link to the mantis item. AI: Steven - row 150 id 50 will track down what text he thinks needs to be changed so that we can think of these as class members. AI: Francoise - will have a proposal by next meeting. AI: Arturo - row 151 id 51: take a look at this one (and line 152 id 52) AI: Francoise - add to mantis 2575 (line 150, id 50) AI: Mark - row 153 id 67write up a proposal AI: Francoise - row 154 id 53 write a proposal to move that one sentence earlier in this section. AI: Jonathan - row 158 id 182 will take a look at it. AI: Mehdi - row 167 id 183 add to the email vote. ================= Action item list provided for sv-ec =================== ============ from April 13 2009 meeting =================== AI: Mehdi - conduct an email vote on the trivial items.[requires proposals] AI: Steven - row 128, id 20; put together a proposal, mantis 2634 AI: Steven - row 130, id 21, will gather some input on this. AI: Dave - row 131, id 184; put together a proposal. AI: Arturo - row 132, 133, id 30 & 31; write it up, both 132 and 133 AI: Stu - row 134, id 35; writeup a proposal AI: Jonathan - combine rows 135-139 [ids: 36-40] into one mantis item. AI: Dave - row 140, id 186; put together a proposal. AI: Dave - row 141, id 43; put together a proposal for this AI: Jonathan - row 142, id 44; will put together a proposal. AI: Dave - row 143, id 188; will look into 141, 144 AI: Dave - row 144, id 45; combine this with row 141, id 43 AI: Stu - row 145, id 46; will write a proposal AI: Dave - row 147, id 181; follow-up on thisfor now AI: Gord - row 149, id 49 [not here, but on his list to discuss/review] AI: Francoise - row 150, id 50; will follow-up for now AI: Francoise & Gord - row 151, id 51; will follow-up for now AI: Francoise - row 152, id 52; will follow-up AI: Francoise - row 153, id 67; will look at it. AI: Francoise - row 154, id 53; will follow-up. AI: Francoise - row 156, id 55; will follow-up, non-trvial AI: Cliff - row 157, id 57; put together a proposal AI: Dave - row 158, id 182; follow-up, proposal, maybe trivial. AI: Mehdi - row 159, id 58; editoral, assign to editor. AI: Gord - row 160, id 59; related to id 50. AI: Mehdi - row 160, id 60; editoral, assign to editor AI: Mehdi - row 162, id 61; editoral, assign to editor AI: Gord, & Francoise - rows 163-166, id [59-62]; to follow-up. AI: Dave - row 167, id 183; follow-up, non-trivial AI: Mehdi - row 168, id 80; proposal exists, add to email vote AI: Mehdi - row 169, id 81; send to sv-ac; sv-ec has no change to recommend. AI: Mehdi - row 170, id 101; send to sv-ac AI: Ray - row 171, id 102; put together a proposal AI: Dave - row 172, id 102; follow-up, nontrivial AI: Dave - row 173, id 190; follow-up, nontrivial AI: Mehdi - row 174, id 104; assign to editor. AI: David Scott - row 175, id 105, follow-up, non-trivial AI: David Scott - row 176, id 106, follow-up, maybe trivial AI: David Scott - row 177, id 107, follow-up, non-trivial AI: Mehdi - row 178, id 108; assign to editor. AI: Francoise - row 179, id 109; try to get more information AI: David Scott - row 180, id 110; make sure it is a duplicate AI: Francoise - row 181, id 111; get more clarification. AI: Mehdi - row 182, id 112, assign to editor AI: David Scott - row 183, id 113, follow-up, trivial. AI: Arturo - row 184, id 114, put a proposal together; non-trivial AI: Mehdi - row 185, id 115; no change needed AI: David Scott , Gord - row 186, id 116; follow-up. non-trivial AI: Mehdi - row 187, id 117; assign to editor AI: Mehdi - ro2 188, id 118; assign to editor AI: Mehdi - ro2 189, id 119; assign to editor AI: David Scott- row 190, id 121; follow-up, non-trivial. AI: Mehdi - row 191, id 122; assign to editor AI: Arturo - row 192, id 120, follow-up, non-trivial. AI: Mehdi - row 193, id 134; send it to the sv-bc AI: Mehdi - row 194, id 135; send it to the sv-bc (duplicate of id 134) AI: Mehdi - row 195, id 137; assign to editor AI: Dave - row 196, id 185; follow-up, trivial. AI: Dave - row 197, id 192; follow-up, non-trivial.