RE: Comment on Issue 211

From: Steven Sharp (sharp@cadence.com)
Date: Wed Aug 13 2003 - 15:12:00 PDT

  • Next message: Krishna Garlapati: "Re: Comment on Issue 211"

    Precedence: bulk

    There are essentially two questions to be answered for this issue.

    1. Is it the consensus of the ETF that the intent of the LRM was for
       localparams to be ignored/skipped when doing parameter override by
       position?

    2. Does the existing LRM text need to be changed to make the intent
       clearer?

    Steven Sharp
    sharp@cadence.com

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 13 2003 - 15:14:57 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.