[$ieee-1850] Vunit_proposal_6.0.doc

 <<Vunit_proposal_6.0.doc>> 
Hi SC,

Please find attached version 6.0 of the vunit proposal.

This revision addresses the following.
   a) Dmitry concerns on transitive closure of inherited vunits.
   b) Cindly's concerns on inheritance restrictions when binding
        of vunits to modules versus instances.
   c) Sitvanit's comments on pending items (mail dated 3/24)

The following is not addressed in not addressed by this revision.
  a) Verification task 
           - Cadence does not agree to Cindy's proposal here. 
              A separate email will discuss that.
  b) abstract keyword
           - After Dmitry's email we feel that the abstract keyword is 
             redundant. It does not break backward compatibility 
            as the current LRM only mentions that tools are free to
choose
            the binding of unbound vunits, not that they are bound to 
            the top module of the design hierarchy.

Please review and send your comments. We can discuss the same
in the issues SC on 4/28.

thanks and regards,
nss



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.