errata/582: another inquiry

From: Steven Sharp (sharp@cadence.com)
Date: Fri Jun 11 2004 - 10:10:00 PDT

  • Next message: Steven Sharp: "errata/586: PROPOSAL - Case signedness"

    The following reply was made to PR errata/582; it has been noted by GNATS.

    From: Steven Sharp <sharp@cadence.com>
    To: etf-bugs@boyd.com
    Cc:
    Subject: errata/582: another inquiry
    Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:07:48 -0400 (EDT)

     I am forwarding this query, which shows someone else concerned with this
     issue.
     
     ------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------
     
     Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 06:48:27 +0000
     From: Pooja Maheshwari <mpooja@agere.com>
     X-Accept-Language: en
     MIME-Version: 1.0
     To: Steven Sharp <sharp@cadence.com>, stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
     CC: Pooja Maheshwari <mpooja@agere.com>
     Subject: Queries in Verilog-2001 std.
     
     Hello Steve/Stuart,
     
     I found some discrepancy in config section ( Clause 13 of
     IEEE1364-2001).
     In config section, design statement and config_rule_statements are
     allowed.
     
     According to BNF ( in tables 13.4 - 13.9 )
         (*) a ";" is expected after design statement.
         (*) no ";" should be there after config rule statement
                         (default liblist clause, instance clause, etc.)
     
     In examples,
         (*) 13.3.2 ";" is used after both design and config rule
                 statements ( config bot, config top).
         (*) 13.5.2 ";" is not used in design statement but used
                 in config rule statement ( config cfg1, cfg2, etc.).
     
     My question is, whether ";" should be there after design statement,
      or after "config rule statement" or both.
     
     Thanks,
     Pooja
     
     
     
     
     ------------- End Forwarded Message -------------
     
     
     Steven Sharp
     sharp@cadence.com
     

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 11 2004 - 10:10:26 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.