Folks, We have closure on this issue. See below. Cheers, PA -- Dr. Peter J. Ashenden peter@ashenden.com.au Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd. www.ashenden.com.au PO Box 640 VoIP: sip://0871270078@sip.internode.on.net Stirling, SA 5152 Phone: +61 8 7127 0078 Australia Mobile: +61 414 70 9106 -----Original Message----- From: Hanna, William A [mailto:william.a.hanna@boeing.com] Sent: Tuesday, 15 July 2008 22:59 To: Peter Ashenden Subject: RE: Proposed response to your P1076 ballot comment Dr. Ashenden: I agree with the proposed statemnt as an acceptable compromise. My concern is for people who are using VHDL strictly as a minimum desin tool and for the VHDL tool vendor who is trying to satisfy the needs of this type of user. Thanks. William A. (Bill) Hanna; Ph.D.EE Technical Fellow - Electronics Design&Analysis Boeing-IDS Programs Phone: (314) 232-0714 MC S106-3060 Mobile: (314) 302-8039 St. Louis, MO 63166-0516 E-Mail: william.a.hanna@boeing.com _____ From: Peter Ashenden [mailto:peter@ashenden.com.au] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 6:04 AM To: Hanna, William A Cc: isac@eda.org Subject: RE: Proposed response to your P1076 ballot comment Bill, Thanks very much for responding so quickly. I think option 2 is the most likely to succeed. The ballot resolution committee is firmly of the view that making VHPI completely optional is not feasible. In a sense, the statement in option 2 is already implicit in the specification of the VHPI. However, a Note to that effect in subclause 17.3 (where capability sets are described) would certainly make the implication clear. I'd suggest the following wording: Note---A minimal implementation of the VHPI need only provide the function interface described in Clause 23 and Annex B, with none of the capability sets described in this subclause being implemented by the tool. In such a minimal implementation, calls to functions would, in most cases, raise a VHPI error condition. I would be grateful if you would confirm agreement with this compromise at your earliest convenience. Many thanks, and best regards, PA -- Dr. Peter J. Ashenden peter@ashenden.com.au Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd. www.ashenden.com.au PO Box 640 VoIP: sip://0871270078@sip.internode.on.net Stirling, SA 5152 Phone: +61 8 7127 0078 Australia Mobile: +61 414 70 9106 -----Original Message----- From: Hanna, William A [mailto:william.a.hanna@boeing.com] Sent: Monday, 14 July 2008 23:19 To: Peter Ashenden Subject: RE: Proposed response to your P1076 ballot comment Dr. Ashenden: How R U? 1. I have a lot of appreciation for VHPI, however, I find it difficult for the average user/provider of VHDL to implement and use. For this reason, I would like to see a language saying that a proper VDL implementation does not have to include VHPI. 2. I would accept the compromise your E-mail suggests: "The ISAC notes that a minimal implementation of the VHPI need not be burdensome. The VHPI provides a means for a tool to provide a subset of the full VHPI capability and for VHPI programs to query the capabilities provided by the tool (see subclause 17.3 of D4.2). A minimal implementation need only provide the function interface described in Clause 23 and Annex B, with none of the capabilities described in 17.3 being implemented by the tool. Calls to the functions would generally return an error indication." If language is added to that effect, otherwise I will be compelled to keep my No Vote. I look forwar to hear from you. Thanks. P.S. There is some typo's in the standard, I did not care to mention, and I recommend informally a final check for typing errors and a final check for consistency in numbering. Thanks again. William A. (Bill) Hanna; Ph.D.EE Technical Fellow - Electronics Design&Analysis Boeing-IDS Programs Phone: (314) 232-0714 MC S106-3060 Mobile: (314) 302-8039 St. Louis, MO 63166-0516 E-Mail: william.a.hanna@boeing.com -----Original Message----- From: Peter Ashenden [ <mailto:peter@ashenden.com.au> mailto:peter@ashenden.com.au] Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2008 6:29 AM To: Hanna, William A Cc: isac@eda.org Subject: Proposed response to your P1076 ballot comment Dear Dr Hanna, Thank you for participating in the recent IEEE ballot on the revision of the VHDL standard. As part of the ballot resolution process, the ISAC needs to discuss with you the proposed response to your negative comment. Your comment was: All references to VHPI should be made optional - should be removed from body of the LRM into an Appendix. And your proposed resolution was: Move VHPI to an Appendix - Annex and state that it is optional The ISAC has considered your comment and proposes not to implement your suggestion. The rationale is as follows: The VHPI was incorporated into VHDL as an amendment, 1076c. Its inclusion as an integral, non-optional part of the standard was approved by the balloting body for the amendment project, and the amended standard was approved by IEEE in 2007. Specification of the VHPI requires some significant changes to details of aspects of the language, notably, to the simulation cycle as specified in Clause 12 of IEEE 1076c-2007. Making the VHPI optional would require specifying and maintaining two versions of the simulation cycle, one without VHPI and one with VHPI. This would be difficult and error prone. The ISAC notes that a minimal implementation of the VHPI need not be burdensome. The VHPI provides a means for a tool to provide a subset of the full VHPI capability and for VHPI programs to query the capabilities provided by the tool (see subclause 17.3 of D4.2). A minimal implementation need only provide the function interface described in Clause 23 and Annex B, with none of the capabilities described in 17.3 being implemented by the tool. Calls to the functions would generally return an error indication. I would be grateful if you would indicate whether this is acceptable to you and whether, as a consequence, you would change your vote from Disapprove to Approve. If not, would you like to offer any alternative proposal that the ISAC could consider? Once again, thank you for your participation. The ISAC very much appreciates your longstanding involvement with the VHDL standard. Best regards, Peter Ashenden P1076 Technical Editor -- Dr. Peter J. Ashenden peter@ashenden.com.au Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd. <file://www.ashenden.com.au> www.ashenden.com.au PO Box 640 VoIP: sip://0871270078@sip.internode.on.net Stirling, SA 5152 Phone: +61 8 7127 0078 Australia Mobile: +61 414 70 9106 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Tue Jul 15 06:37:33 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jul 15 2008 - 06:37:35 PDT