Subject: Re:RE: [sv-cc] Final call for SV-CC LRM editing comments
From: Swapnajit Mittra (mittra@juno.com)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 15:56:49 PDT
   Joao, 
   Thanks for the  clarification. 
   - Swapnajit. 
   ---------- "Joao Geada" <Joao.Geada@synopsys.com> writes:
I've just checked with Doug and he agrees: this was not to go into the
LRM; the exercise was intended to "kick the tires" of the DPI interface and
validate its functionality on user examples.
Joao
==============================================================================
Joao Geada, PhD             Principal Engineer                Verif Tech Group
Synopsys, Inc                                              TEL: (508) 263-8083
377 Simarano Drive, Suite 300,                             FAX: (508) 263-8069
Marlboro, MA 01752, USA
==============================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Joao Geada [mailto:joao@synopsys.com]
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 5:54 PM
To: Swapnajit Mittra
Cc: Ghassan Khoory
Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Final call for SV-CC LRM editing comments
Swapnajit,
no-one told me that John's example was to be included ...
Joao
==============================================================================
Joao Geada, PhD             Principal Engineer                Verif Tech Group
Synopsys, Inc                                              TEL: (508) 263-8083
377 Simarano Drive, Suite 300,                             FAX: (508) 263-8069
Marlboro, MA 01752, USA
==============================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org]On Behalf Of
Swapnajit Mittra
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 3:22 PM
To: sv-cc@eda.org
Subject: [sv-cc] Final call for SV-CC LRM editing comments
   Team, 
   As we have crossed the deadline on SV-CC LRM 
   editing comments, I thought I would write down 
   the resolutions of the last few issues here as
   I understand them. Please correct me immediately, 
   if I am wrong and any additional correction needs 
   to be made in the LRM for this. 
   o Open array vs Dynamic array: I have forwarded 
   the SV-CC remarks (penned by Doug - thanks!) to 
   SV-EC. I have not heard anything back from them. 
   With this, I am assuming we are keeping the name 
   'open array' for our side. 
   o attribute vs pragma: I have noted this down for 
   consideration in SV 3.2. For the time being pragmas 
   stay. 
   o John Stickley's example: No new comment on this. 
   So the last version stays (Joao, can you please 
   check if this example has been put in the right 
   place?)
   Regards, 
   - Swapnajit. 
-- Swapnajit Mittra Project VeriPage ::: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/verilog________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com pe
-- Swapnajit Mittra Project VeriPage ::: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/verilog
________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 15:58:36 PDT