RE: Draft3 review comments/feedback

Sri,

In a quick comparison to your list, it appears that I am missing one of
Geoffrey's messages, but I cannot tell for sure which one.  I also do not
have a message from Ken Kundert or from Dave miller in my folder.

More importantly, many of comments in the messages that I have are either
comments or questions to the committee.  They are not specific directions on
editorial corrections that need to be made.

I think the committee, or someone from the committee, needs to go through
these e-mails and make two lists: 1) EXACT changes the editor needs to make,
and 2) subjects the committee needs to resolve.

Based on a cursory scan, the notes in the two sets of minutes are explicit
enough for me to work with for editorial changes.  It is the comments and
questions in the various e-mails that need to be collected and made more
specific.

When would you like to see draft 4?

Stu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Sutherland
stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
+1-503-692-0898

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-verilog-ams@eda.org [mailto:owner-verilog-ams@eda.org] On
> Behalf Of Sri Chandra
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 4:25 AM
> To: Verilog-AMS LRM Committee; Stuart Sutherland
> Subject: Draft3 review comments/feedback
> 
> 
> Stu,
> 
> I just wanted to understand from your end whether you have all the
> comments/feedback on draft3. I understand there were minutes, but some
> of the other comments came as just emails. I am not sure how exactly to
> track these to make these updates in draft4 of the LRM. Its not easy to
> skim through the additional emails, unless there is Mantis raised for
> each, but some of them are bit trivial fixes. What do you suggest on
> how
> to proceed.
> 
> I have recorded the following minutes and emails that have been sent
> across that needs to go into draft4 of the LRM.
> 
> 
> Minutes of Meetings:
> ====================
> * Meeting minutes - 27th March 2008 (with follow up email from Shalom
> Bresticker on the apostrophe for concatenation). We can correct the
> example as he has specified to be consistent with IEEE P1800.
> * Meeting minutes - 3rd April 2008
> 
> Additional messages from members:
> =================================
> Some of the below items were captured in the minutes, but probably not
> all.
> * enable argument missing in BNF for cross - email from Dave miller on
> 3rd April (Dave - can you raise a mantis with a small proposal on this
> please)
> * Mantis on V(n1,n1): http://www.verilog.org/mantis/view.php?id=2345
> * Email from Ken Kundert, 28th March 2008 (Comments on Version 2.3
> draft 3)
> * Email from Geoffrey Coram, 28th March 2008 (Re: Comments on Version
> 2.3 draft 3)
> * Email from Xavier Bestel, 28th March 2008 (Re: Comments on Version
> 2.3
> draft 3)
> * Email from Geoffrey Coram, 28th March 2008 (Re: Comments on Version
> 2.3 draft 3): regarding _ missing in the BNF
> * Email from Geoffrey Coram, 28th March 2008 (Re: Comments on Version
> 2.3 draft 3): Starts with comments from Page 152 (169 of PDF)
> * Email from Geoffrey Coram, 28th March 2008 (Re: Comments on Version
> 2.3 draft 3): talks about `define and `undef
> 
> Regards,
> Sri
> --
> Srikanth Chandrasekaran
> Design Technology (Tools Development)
> Freescale Semiconductor Inc.
> T:+91-120-439 5000 p:x3824 f: x5199
> 
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.



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