RE: Merge with 1364

Graham,

The P1364 PAR is under the SV WG, which is also handling P1800.
The P1364 group is not independent.
The P1364 PAR does not allow for extensions which will break its compatibility
with P1800. P1364 needs to be a subset of P1800. For example, the BNF.

In short, I don't believe the SV WG will agree to incorporate AMS into 1364
rather than into 1800.

Shalom


On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Helwig Graham-A11558 wrote:

> Hello Geoffery,
> 
> I have also been considering for sometime how to update the body of the AMS LRM when it is merged with 2005 standard.  
> 
> Historically, the current LRM format has served us well as the AMS extensions were developed but now we are looking at merging and donating the AMS LRM to the 1364 standards committee. As a result, I believe a more closely aligned AMS LRM format is needed with the 2005 format. If the 1364 standard committee accepts the donation of the AMS LRM, I would expect that the AMS and 2005 documents would be merged together at some point in the future. I don't think the 1364 committee will be keen merging the 2 document together in the current format.
> 
> Since AMS language is an extension to 1364 language, then I would treat the AMS LRM format in the same way. I would include all of the 2005 document sections into the AMS LRM and reference these section's contents back to the 2005 document, unless it have been affected by introduction of AMS features. The documentation for AMS specific language features (i.e.. analog UDFs) can be appended to similar section (i.e.. UDFs section). I would also expect one or 2 new sections will need to be added to contain the bulk of the pure AMS features (analog block, connect rules ,etc) and documentation of the AMS language that does not fit cleanly into existing 2005 sections.
> 
> Attached is an example of how I would go about merging the analog UDF definition into the 2001 UDF section. Note, digital UDF definitions are referenced back to the 2001 document while the analog UDF definition is appended to the end of the section. Preserving the 2001 section in the AMS LRM enables additional semantic constrains to be documented about the usage of digital UDF in the analog context, etc. This example conceivably can be extended to the entire AMS document.
> 
> Regarding analog system tasks and functions, I would replicate the system task/function section format from the 2005 document and reference the digital system task and function definitions back to the 2005 document. I would appended the analog system function and task definitions at the end of the document, since more work is require to properly merge the analog and digital $strobe definitions. By doing this merger, efforts can be made to unify common analog and digital system task and functions together. 

-- 
Shalom Bresticker                        Shalom.Bresticker @freescale.com
Design & Verification Methodology                    Tel: +972 9  9522268
Freescale Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                 Fax: +972 9  9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                     Cell: +972 50 5441478
  
[ ]Freescale Internal Use Only      [ ]Freescale Confidential Proprietary