Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Assertion API errata
From: Swapnajit Mittra (mittra@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 25 2003 - 19:30:34 PST
Team,
At the risk of stating something obvious here - we need to be
*extremely* careful about the versions of the docs that we
are reviewing at this juncture; particularly so since we
do not have a good automated rev control system in place.
Just as a gentle reminder, here is the review procedure that
we should follow:
When reviewing an old chapter (from SV 3.1), the basis for
the review should be the latest draft of SV3.1A (which as
of today is draft# 2) plus all the errata that we have
discussed and decided to introduce on that draft. The
drafts are available from SV website:
http://www.eda.org/sv/
and the changelist on the latest draft (or, for that matter,
any draft) is also available from the same page.
I know an automated rev control would have been much better,
but until that happens, we need to follow this somewhat
manual procedure.
With great appreciation for all of your hard works,
-- Swapnajit Mittra Project VeriPage ::: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/verilog-- "Bassam Tabbara" <bassam@novas.com> wrote: Swapnajit no we cannot do that I will respond shortly to the original email.
-Bassam.
-- Dr. Bassam Tabbara Technical Manager, R&D Novas Software, Inc.
http://www.novas.com (408) 467-7893
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On > Behalf Of Swapnajit Mittra > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 9:50 PM > To: Michael.Rohleder@motorola.com > Cc: sv-cc@eda.org > Subject: Re: [sv-cc] Assertion API errata > > > > > Michael, > > Thanks for sending these out. > > Hello all, > > Unless there is any objection, to save time we will not have > a new poll on these errata as we already have consensus on > these issues during the last assertion poll. > > If you have any new comment on these bring them up during > our next meeting, or otherwise, we will accept them > unanimously. > > -- > Swapnajit Mittra > Project VeriPage ::: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/verilog > > Michael Rohleder wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > please find below the remaining Errata for the Assertion API. > > It contains my two action items (using a typedef for the cb_rtn > > function, and provide list for the possible content of > attempt_time) > > plus three more items I found: > > - the first parameter of the vpi_register_assertion_cb() function > > has still no name (I thought I have seen that Bassam already > > fixed this, but it is not in draft2) > > - the name of the time data slot is attemptTime, despite the fact > > that we are talking about attempt_time in the corresponding text > > - for whatever reason there is a comma after attemptTime, instead > > of a semicolon > [...] > > ________________________________________________________________ > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! >
________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Dec 25 2003 - 19:33:21 PST