SV-EC Committee Meeting Monday November 12 2007 11:00am - 1:00pm PST With the new calculations for voting rights below... 3/4 rule = 0.75 * 32 = 24 Meeting number: --------------------------------- 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000011111111112222222222333 12345678901234567890123456789012 Meeting Days: --------------------------------- (12120202010202010131120202010121) Day (48159360488250595604159360671592) (00001111110000000000000000001111) Month (88990011221122334445667788990001) (00000000000000000000000000000000) Year (66666666667777777777777777777777) ------ Attendees ---------------- (-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAAA-A--AAAAA) Arturo Salz 27 (--AAA-AAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAA--A-A-AA) Cliff Cummings 24 (AAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA) Dave Rich 31 (AA-A-AAA-AAAAAAA---AAAAAAAAAAAAA) Francoise Martinolle 26 (-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAA-A) Mehdi Mohtashemi 29 (AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAA) Neil Korpusik 31 (AAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA) Ray Ryan 31 (AAAAAAAAAAAA-AAA---AAA-AAAAAAAAA) Gordon Vreugdenhil 27 (AAAAAA--AAAAA-A--AAAAAAAAA-AAAAA) Steven Sharp 26 (--AAAA-A------------------------) Phil Moorby 05 - No voting rights (---AA-AAA-AAAA-AA-A-------------) Doug Warmke 12 - No voting rights (AAAAAAA---AA-A-AAAAAAA---AAAAAAA) Stu Sutherland 24 (-AAAA--AAAA-A-AAAAA-AAAA-AAAAAAA) Heath Chambers 25 (-AAAAAA-A----AAAAAAAAA--AAAAAAA-) Don Mills 23 - (2 of last 3) (--AA--A---A-AAA--A-AAAA-A-A--A--) Jonathan Bromley 15 - No voting rights (--A-----------------------------) Logie Ramachandran 01 - No voting rights (----AAA-------------------------) Melvin Cardoza 03 - No voting rights (-----A-AAAAAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA) Mark Hartoog 25 (-------A-------------A----------) Satia (from Intel) 02 - No voting rights (--------AAA---------------------) Rob Slater 03 - No voting rights (-------------A------------------) Alex Gran - Mentor 01 - No voting rights (---------------A-AAA-AAAAA--A-AA) Mike Mintz 12 - (2 of last 3) (------------------AAAAAAAAAAAA-A) Geoffrey Coram 13 - (2 of last 3) (-------------------AAAAAAAAAA-AA) David Scott - Mentor 12 - (2 of last 3) (------------------------A-------) Benjamin Chen - Cisco 01 - No voting rights (---------------------------AAAAA) Mike Burns - Freescale 05 (2 of last 3) [for next meeting] 16 people (other than the chair) currently have voting rights ** Minutes taken by Neil Korpusik and Mehdi Mohtashemi ////////////////// November 12, 2007 ///////////////////////// 1. Review IEEE patent policy ----------------------------- ref: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Move: Cliff - Assume that the patent policy was read Second: Steve Abstain: None Opposed: None Passed unanimously 2. Review meeting minutes/Notes: ------------------------------------------------- http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_October_15_2007_Minutes.txt http://www.eda-stds.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_October_29_2007_Minutes.txt will vote on these next meeting. http://www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes/SV-EC_Meeting_NameResolution_November_5_2007_notes.txt 3. Update from Champions meeting of 10/25/2007 -------------------------------------------------- Any mantis items discussed. 2176 related to 1980 Redundant sentence can be removed from 7.5.1 - Neil added it as a result of the Champions meeting (10/25) - it should be an easy mantis item to close 4. P1800 working group, schedule updates and discussion ----------------------------------------------------------- a) version D4 of LRM is available b) New schedule from p1800 meeting (October 4 2007) c) Next p1800 working group meeting: November 15 2007. 11/12/2007 all committees must open active Mantis items that they are going to complete for this release. They may not work on any item not on in this list. Need to have a plan for completion of items. For svec we just say all to be done by 12/15(?) 12/15/2007 SV-BC and SV-EC must complete all items from their Mantis list. Past this date they are only authorized to work on merge, editing and champions issues. The current svec list for remaining time allotted 412 5.14.1 Queue operator examples use aggregate constructors incorrectly 522 use of concatenation in 5.14.2 (Francoise) 521 pattern assignment for queues (Francoise) 520 example of queues assignment (Francoise) 519 section 5.14,empty array literal syntax (Francoise) 518 queues and arrays (Francoise) 517 concatenation syntax usage section 5.14 (Francoise) 516 5.7 and 5.8 description of type compatible arrays 1702 queue syntax issues Mike - Used by Freescale - it seems to be broken today 958 dynamic array size method unclear when empty 974 comparison of dynamic arrays/queues to 1-dimensional fixed arrays 1447 Contradictory stmts about unsized array dimensions (5.1 vs. 5.7, 5.8) Mike - Freescale is hitting into this problem Steven - do we know the right answer yet? 801 Errors in assignment pattern in 5.4 example 1608 equality, inequality and conditional operator rules for class handles Francoise - went through champions? (Neil - no) Neil - was passed by svec - not in resolved state yet (10/15) 1594 relational ops on class handles Neil - passed in the svec unanimously (10/15) 1584 defaults in virtual methods 1256 linked list description Gord - we should define a package for it, what is there is just wrong - would like to deprecate it for now - it would be useful to have it, but it needs to be done in a different way - C++ has the STL standardized library - Mentor will not implement it given the way it is written - Cadence - not high on their list Stu - users have expressed interest in it Jonathan - it would be good for a dot-standard Straw poll - Who is opposed to ripping out the list definition completely? Stu - opposed (Meant that he would like it to be in the standard) Dave - queues covers most of the linked list capability 1714 singular type as the mailbox default 1857 external method definitions and parameterized class type 2035 class methods with static lifetime) 2080 "::" is ambiguous in parameterized classes 2087 Semantic intent of qualified BNF terminals must be clarified Was approved in svec 10/15 2113 Inconsistency in constraining assoc array size (oct 29 meeting) Has a proposal - we are close 2164 Use "base class" instead of "parent class" in 8.12 (oct 29 meeting) - That text was cloned out of the existing section - There are several sections of the LRM that should be redone. - Was on Gord's to-do list but he doesn't have time to all of them AI/Arturo - will take a look at it 2109 Mantis items related to Name Resolution issues <----< more were added to the list during the meeting >-------> 2137 Some assertion contexts should be procedural Mike burns added it 11/12/07 2149 Covergroups sample method with arguments Mike Burns - an enhancement - high for Freescale 2181 Ambiguity in implicit declaration of production vars in randsequence Ray 1858 Name binding in inline constraints 1719 Shallow copy constructor needs clarification - Francoise 2112 an enhancement - Dave's list - did this make it to the list??? --------------------< Mehdi's prioritized list >-------------------- We spent some time putting the list into a prioritized order. 2109, 1516, 1857, 2080 name resolution and related 1702, 801 list, covers all queue items 2164 Use "base class" instead of "parent class" in 8.12 1714 singular type as the mailbox default 1447 (detailed proposal, fixed up for D4). 1584 defaults in virtual methods 2035 class methods with static lifetime) 958 974 1256 linked list description 1719 Shallow copy constructor needs clarification 2149 agreed to add it after discussing it a bit 5. Updates: Name Resolution meeting (Nov 5th 2007) ---------------------------------------------- next: name resolution, 6. Review mantis items with proposals -------------------------------------------------------- 2176 - from Champions - simple change (categorize as feedback from Champions) 1857 - external method definitions and parameterized class types 1858 - Name binding in inline constraints 2055 - coverage bin distribution is not even 2113 Inconsistency in constraining assoc array size Ray: Mike Burns has updated it since last meeting Mike - made changes to the proposal based on feedback from last meeting Arturo - question about adding to the back of the queue - with a dynamic array there is a resize operation - if we ever want to allow the creation of objects using constraints this could be a problem. This would limit us to only adding to the tail of the existing queue. - dynamic arrays have same problem Move: Mike B moves to approve 2113 2113_D4_20071029.pdf Second: Ray Abstain: None Opposed: None Passed unanimously 2137 procedural context for assertions Mike B: it is in 9.2. No procedural call for assertions. This grew from the covergroup sampling item. it is an incosistency, the current proposal needs to be changed - has suggested that the proposal be split into two pieces (one for svbc and one for svac) Arturo: the AC did intend for these to be allowed. Dave: it is on the things EC has added, not anything that BC has added. Mike B: Need BC to relinquish the ownership of 9.2, and then AC can make clarification. AI/ Mike Burns: will ask sv-ac to create a proposal and ask sv-bc and sv-ec to review it. This is a sv-ac issue. 2181 Ambiguity in implicit declaration of production variables in randsequence Ray: there are 2 cases of concern - see the example shown in the bug note Francoise - why are these variables implicitly declared? - they could be explicitly declared Steven - just take the number in the action block you are working on. - it seems like it should scope to the rule (see option 2 in note) Arturo - yes, that sounds correct - syntactical or lexical - was the intent Ray - the code blocks are scopes - the variables in the productions come from the outer scope - propose to create the variables in the scope of the rules AI: Ray: will update the proposal 2183 Only simple identifiers allowed in solve-before constraint [Ray] AI: correct the BNF, Ray: use an expression and have a semantic restriction 2149: Covergroups sample method with arguments David S. - Jonathan described using a class wrapper for this problem Mike B. - want to gather data within an assertion in local variables, use semantics of assertions (ie local threads and copies of local variables). Use sample() of a cg in the action blocks. - can declare wires, and then sample cg manually (a pain) - don't want to add all of the extra glue - the proposal looks clean to Freescale Arturo - there is a lot of glue to write in this scenario David S. - Arturo sent out a response to his email 1702 queue syntax issues Francoise: a queue is an array Steven: a slice of a queue in a concatenation (flatten versus not flatten) Gord: existing concatenation rules for queues, some in bc want that syntax to go away completely Steven: there is no text description, just examples Dave: does it make sense to get rid of it or turn it into an assignment pattern? Gord: people aren't happy with current syntax, people don't hate the functionality, but don't like the syntax Francoise: it is inconsistent with initialization of other array types Jonathan: useles unless you have an array explode operator, queues have a dynamic size, Concat of queues will flatten the queues Gord: not specified behavior in the LRM Dave: explained by examples Steven: examples are not normative, the things being done in the examples are not possible with current assignment patterns. These curly brace things are not defined for queues today Jonathan: thinks that people are already using this capability can't just outlaw it and make it go away Gord: there are issues with ambiguity, as soon as types are unknown, Steven: it will take a lot of work to specify it Gord: that is why it was brought up by the svbc Ray: current behavior needs to go away, and a new behavior needs to be added Steven: the people that think it exists should define it Gord: svbc brought it up some time ago, didn't want to just outlaw it and send it to the champions. Jonathan: if self determined type of element is same as queue - ok one other case is ok other cases are illegal different from assignment patterns, something special for queues Gord: under what conditions do you know that you are dealing with a queue? for assignment patterns it is clear what to do. Need special rules for the queue cases. Mehdi: is there a consensus of which items to work on? Steven: queues name resolution issues Mike B.: name resolution issues in particular in-line constraints AI/ Jonathan : will createstrawman proposal for 1702 Steven: will review any proposal Francoise can help Dave: will try to put some time into it 7. Next meetings: -------------------------------- Monday November 19, 2007 - name resolution meeting - week of Thanksgiving Monday November 26, 2007 - Monday after Thanksgiving Monday December 10, 2007 - regular svec meeting