Subject: Comments on P1364.1/Draft 2.3
From: Shalom Bresticker (Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com)
Date: Tue Oct 01 2002 - 00:48:15 PDT
Hi,
I am not a voting member, so I did not get a copy of Draft 2.3.
However, Jayram promised me the opportunity to see it in order to submit
editorial non-voting comments.
I just got the copy yesterday, after the notification that it passed the
recirculation vote.
If I had a vote, I would still vote against it, but since I don't have a
vote,
I chose the lesser evil and will try to submit constructive comments,
with varying levels of importance.
Most of these are editorial and are on my marked-up copy of Draft 2.2.
From my experience with 1364-2001, you cannot depend on the IEEE editors
to spot and fix everything. (Sometimes they also spoil things...)
So here are my comments up to and including Clause 4, with the rest in
the coming days.
Thanks,
Shalom
TOC, 5.5: x and z should be bold.
TOC, Annex A and B: appear twice.
1.1, line 3: "is used" should be "are used".
3, "combinational logic": should probably be "neither ... nor" instead
of "either ... or".
Either way, no comma before "n/or".
3, "edge-sensitive storage device", "level-sensitive storage device":
awkward wordings as well as somewhat circular. Better are:
"Any device that is sensitive to a clock edge and that is mapped to by a
synthesis tool, e.g., a flip-flop."
"Any device that is sensitive to a clock level and that is mapped to by
a synthesis tool, e.g., a latch."
3, "timeout clause": The term is strange, as it has nothing to do with
timeouts, nor is it used in 1364. It is only used in 2 places, in clause
4, para. 2, and in 4.1, para. 1. If you must use it, then how about
"assignment delay", instead?
4, para. 2, lines 8-9: "If the outputs match at the compared ports, the
synthesis tool shall be compliant."
"shall be" denotes a requirement, so it seems out of place here. Maybe
simply "is", instead? Or "shall be called"
or "shall be considered"?
4, para. 2, last line: change 6.1.4 to 6.1.4.5.
4, para. 2, last line: change "ensured" to "required".
4(d) and 4(e) should use parallel wording: in (e) change
"level-sensitive storage device based designs" to "level-sensitive based
designs". In 2nd line, change "storage device" to "storage element" (or
in (d), change "storage element" to "storage device").
4.2(a), line 7: change "sufficient enough" to just "sufficient".
4.2(b), lines 4 and 5: Parenthetical terms "(i.e., latch)" and "(i.e.,
latched)" are unclear and confusing.
4.2(b), line 5: "combinational delays" is not defined and not used
anywhere else. Should be "transient delays"?
Annex A: Question: Is Annex A informative or normative?
B.10: In subclause title, 'X' should be lower-case and bold.
-- 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 : Tue Oct 01 2002 - 00:59:51 PDT