Subject: Re: [sv-cc] My vote on issue 1.9
From: Francoise Martinolle (fm@cadence.com)
Date: Thu Feb 27 2003 - 08:41:50 PST
I vote yes for part 1 shared library inclusion with the objection to
specify in the standard
the names of the switch for the simulator.
I vote no for part 2 source code inclusion.
I will send specific detailed comments later.
Thanks Michael for putting this together.
Francoise
'
At 04:45 AM 2/27/2003 +0000, Swapnajit Mittra wrote:
>Francoise,
>
>The poll is on whether we accept Michael's
>proposal (Part 1 and 2) for inclusion in the
>SV-CC LRM.
>
>As far as I know Michael did not send any
>update since I sent the poll announcement
>(Michael, please correct me if I am wrong).
>
>Considering the lateness of this reply,
>I will wait till my noon time tomorrow
>before announcing the result of the poll.
>You may send your comment separately
>for Part 1 and 2 (as some already did).
>
>Regards,
>- Swapnajit.
>
>Francoise wrote:
>
>I am a little bit confused on what we are voting.
>Previous votes refer to different things.
>Swanajit,
>
>
>can you rephrase the things we are voting on clearly. and send the
>latest updated documents from Michael on which we need to vote on.
>thanks
>
>
>Francoise
> '
>
>
>
>
>--
>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 : Thu Feb 27 2003 - 08:42:56 PST