Subject: Re: feedback for the ballot response document
From: Shalom Bresticker (Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com)
Date: Thu Aug 29 2002 - 08:01:27 PDT
You're correct, but I return to my original point.
The draft says they "SHALL NOT be supported" (emphasis mine).
And 1.3 defines "not supported" as
"RTL sythesis SHALL NOT support the construct." (emphasis mine).
Shalom
Jayaram Bhasker wrote:
> Shalom:
>
> The statement:
>
> > That means that it is FORBIDDEN for a synthesis tool to support the
> > deprecated features.
>
> was made by you. I was just referencing it.
>
> - bhasker
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
> [mailto:Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Jayaram Bhasker
> Cc: Jenjen Tiao; vlog-synth@eda.org
> Subject: RE: feedback for the ballot response document
>
> In my opinion, you are still contradicting yourself.
>
> First, you say a tool is FORBIDDEN to support it.
> Then you say it is not.
>
> Furthermore, I remind you that the IEEE Style Guide uses "deprecated"
> as a recommendation.
>
> Shalom
>
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Jayaram Bhasker wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 09:02:08 -0700
> > From: Jayaram Bhasker <JBhasker@eSilicon.com>
> > To: 'Shalom Bresticker' <Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com>
> > Cc: Jenjen Tiao <tiao@agere.com>, vlog-synth@eda.org
> > Subject: RE: feedback for the ballot response document
> >
> > Shalom:
> >
> > The terminology is clear to me. The statement:
> >
> > That means that it is FORBIDDEN for a synthesis tool to support the
> > deprecated features.
> >
> > seems to imply that maybe you are mixing up tool support vs model
> > portability. A synthesis tool
> > is NOT prohibited from supporting more than the standard. However a
> > model written using the standard
> > should synthesize to identical behavior on 1364.1-compliant synthesis
> > tools.
> >
> > - bhasker
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shalom Bresticker [mailto:Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 1:16 AM
> > To: Jayaram Bhasker
> > Cc: Jenjen Tiao; vlog-synth@eda.org
> > Subject: Re: feedback for the ballot response document
> >
> >
> > Jayaram,
> >
> > Your answer does not resolve the inconsistency in the terminology.
> >
> >
> > Shalom
> >
> >
> >
> > Jayaram Bhasker wrote:
> >
> >
> > I suppose the issue here is if a synthesis tool continues to support the
> >
> > translate_off/translate_on meta-comments, can the synthesis tool still
> > claim
> > IEEE standard compatibility? (Assuming it also supports the IEEE
> > standard suggested way.)
> > If the answer to the question is yes, then the standard probably wants
> > to use
> > "Unsupported features used among some current synthesis tools" instead.
> >
> > The answer, I think, is yes, and the intention is to signal to users
> > that the practice
> > is highly discouraged even if the supported by the tool.
> > "Unsupported" does not convey that.
> >
> > I have an issue, though, with the wording of 6.3.
> > It says, "Current common practices of .... shall not be supported by
> > this standard."
> >
> >
> > The wording "shall not" is not appropriate here, as it refers to a
> > requirement on
> > a user or implementer of this standard. It is not a requirement on the
> > standard itself.
> >
> >
> > But let us assume that the meaning is simply "is not supported".
> >
> >
> > Let's look at 1.3 Terminology.
> >
> >
> > It says, "Not supported" means "RTL sythesis shall not support the
> > construct.
> > RTL synthesis does not expect to encounter the construct and the failure
> > shall be undefined."
> >
> >
> > That means that it is FORBIDDEN for a synthesis tool to support the
> > deprecated features.
> > Was that really the intention?
> >
> >
> > Further, in the first paragraph of 1.3, it also says, "The word should
> > is used to indicate that ...
> > (in the negative form) a certain course of action is deprecated but not
> > prohibited ("should"
> > equals "is recommended that")."
> >
> >
> > So now I am really confused.
> >
> >
> > Does "deprecated" mean "shall not", i.e., prohibited, or "should not",
> > i.e., not prohibited?
> >
> >
> > [J Bhasker] 6.3 first para clearly states that these features are not
> > supported by the standard.
> >
> >
-- Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com Design & Reuse Methodology Tel: +972 9 9522268 Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890 POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 441478"The devil is in the details."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Aug 29 2002 - 08:07:55 PDT