[sv-cc] RE: Review of P1800/D3 Section 36 (VPI Data Model)

Chuck,

These are all editorial corrections which I can make without a Mantis item
being assigned.  Thanks for finding them!  The changes will be made in the
next draft (which is not due for three or four months).

Stu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Sutherland
Sutherland HDL, Inc.
stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
503-692-0898
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Berking [mailto:berking@cadence.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 2:00 PM
> To: Stuart Sutherland
> Cc: SV-CC
> Subject: Review of P1800/D3 Section 36 (VPI Data Model)
> 
> Stu-
> [ SV-CC members please look this over- especially (3) with "Rationale"
>   notes. Thanks in advance. ]
> 
> Below are my corrections found from reviewing Section 36 (VPI Data
> Model) of P1800/D3.  FYI- I saw that D3a has just come out, but I
> assume from your latest email that this section was not affected.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 1) Bottom of section 36.3.3 "Diagram key for traversing 
> relationships",
>    a minor text correction (grammatical) in the last sentence:
> 
>     "See 36.2 for more details on VPI access constant names"
> 
>    Should be:
> 
>     "See 36.2 for more details on VPI access to constant names"
>                                              ^^
> 
> 2) In section 36.16 "Variables", detail 26 (p. 828), the last 
> reference
>    in the text reads:
> 
>         "(see 8.26"    // no closing paren
> 
>    Should be:
> 
>         "(see 8.27)"
> 
> 3) In section 36.25 "Class definition", detail 5, the phrase:
> 
>         "(refer to 8.16 and 8.23)"
> 
>    Should be:
> 
>         "(refer to 8.16 and 8.24)"
> 
>    [ Rationale: 8.23 is "Out-of-block" declarations for class methods
> vs.
>      8.24 which is "Parameterized Classes"; it is assumed this is what
> the
>      detail text means by iterations on param assigns. ]
>  
> 4) In section 36.35, detail 1, the reference:
> 
>         "(see 17.8)"
> 
>    Should be:
> 
>         "(see 17.7)"
> 
> 



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.