| Number | 200
|
| Category | errata
|
| Synopsis | A.3.1, A.4.1, A.5.4, A.9.3 et al: extra [range]
|
| State | lrmdraft
|
| Class | errata-discuss
|
| Arrival-Date | Nov 19 2002
|
| Originator | Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
|
| Release | 2001b: A.9.3
|
| Environment |
|
| Description |
From Dan Jacobi, SV-BC 19-21 and 19-24: In A.3.1 and A.4.1.1, respectively: name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] In both, the "[ range ]" is redundant. The token "gate/module_instance_identifier" already parses the range when reducing the "arrayed_identifier" token. |
| Fix |
1. In A.9.3, CHANGE gate_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier udp_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier module_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier TO gate_instance_identifier ::= identifier udp_instance_identifier ::= identifier module_instance_identifier ::= identifier 2. In A.9.3, DELETE arrayed_identifier escaped_arrayed_identifier simple_arrayed_identifier 3. NO CHANGE TO name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_udp_instance ::= udp_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] |
| Audit-Trail |
From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com To: etf-bugs@boyd.com Cc: dan.jacobi@intel.com Subject: Re: errata/200: A.3.1, A.4.1.1 et al: extra [range] Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 17:26:02 +0200 (IST) >Category: errata >Confidential: no >Originator: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com >Release: 2001b >Class: TBD >Description: > From Dan Jacobi, SV-BC 19-21 and 19-24: > > In A.3.1 and A.4.1.1, respectively: > > name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] > name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] > > In both, the "[ range ]" is redundant. > > The token "gate/module_instance_identifier" already parses the range when > reducing the "arrayed_identifier" token. Also SV-BC19-26, in A.5.4: name_of_udp_instance ::= udp_instance_identifier [ range ] Also, I can suggest additional improvements. We have: array_identifier ::= simple_arrayed_identifier | escaped_arrayed_identifier simple_arrayed_identifier ::= simple_identifier [ range ] escaped_arrayed_identifier ::= escaped_identifier [ range ] identifier ::= simple_identifier | escaped_identifier So, we can delete simple_arrayed_identifier and escaped_arrayed_identifier, and simply change arrayed_identifier to: arrayed_identifier ::= identifier [ range ] Alternately, we can delete arrayed_identifier as well, leave the following productions without change: name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_udp_instance ::= udp_instance_identifier [ range ] and change gate_instance_identifier, module_instance_identifier, and udp_instance_identifier to be simply identifier instead of arrayed_identifier. From: Dennis Marsa <drm@xilinx.com> To: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com Subject: Re: errata/200: A.3.1, A.4.1.1 et al: extra [range] Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 08:38:41 -0700 >Category: errata >Confidential: no >Originator: Dennis Marsa <drm@xilinx.com> >Release: 2001b >Class: TBD >Description: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com wrote: > > Precedence: bulk > > >Number: 200 > >Category: errata > >Originator: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com > >Environment: > >Description: > > From Dan Jacobi, SV-BC 19-21 and 19-24: > > In A.3.1 and A.4.1.1, respectively: > > name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] > name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] > > In both, the "[ range ]" is redundant. > > The token "gate/module_instance_identifier" already parses the range when > reducing the "arrayed_identifier" token. This is related to Issue #112. Dennis From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com To: Dennis Marsa <drm@xilinx.com> Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com, dan.jacobi@intel.com Subject: Re: errata/200: A.3.1, A.4.1.1 et al: extra [range] Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 21:06:13 +0200 (IST) >Category: errata >Confidential: no >Originator: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com >Release: 2001b >Class: TBD >Description: > This is related to Issue #112. Agreed. 200 duplicates 112, except for the last part I added about simplifying the productions. So no prize to me for submitting the 200th issue... :( From: "Brad Pierce" <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com> To: <etf-bugs@boyd.com> Cc: Subject: Re: errata/200: A.3.1, A.4.1, A.5.4, A.9.3 et al: extra [range] Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:55:03 -0800 Because the current proposal makes name_of_instance and name_of_gate_instance superfluous -- Remove name_of_instance and name_of_gate_instance Replace each occurrence of name_of_instance with module_instance_identifier Replace each occurrence of name_of_gate_instance with gate_instance_identifier -- Brad From: "Brad Pierce" <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com> To: <etf-bugs@boyd.com> Cc: Subject: Re: errata/200: A.3.1, A.4.1, A.5.4, A.9.3 et al: extra [range] Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:06:42 -0800 I notice now that removing name_of_instance and name_of_gate_instance was already suggested in issue 112, which has been marked duplicate. As Shalom pointed out, issue 112 should be marked as 'closed' instead of as 'proposal'. -- Brad From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com To: Brad Pierce <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com> Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com Subject: Re: errata/200: A.3.1, A.4.1, A.5.4, A.9.3 et al: extra [range] Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:29:04 +0200 (IST) I agree. Same for name_of_udp_instance. And then if accepted, #244 (change name_of_instance to name_of_module_instance) becomes superfluous. Shalom > Because the current proposal makes name_of_instance and > name_of_gate_instance superfluous -- > > Remove name_of_instance and name_of_gate_instance > > Replace each occurrence of name_of_instance with > > module_instance_identifier > > Replace each occurrence of name_of_gate_instance with > > gate_instance_identifier From: Shalom Bresticker <Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com> To: Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com Subject: Re: errata/200: [sv-bc] SV-BC-19-24 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:49:48 +0200 Brad, Would you prefer the following proposal to ETF #200 instead of the current proposal? 1. CHANGE gate_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier udp_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier module_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier TO gate_instance_identifier ::= identifier udp_instance_identifier ::= identifier module_instance_identifier ::= identifier 2. DELETE arrayed_identifier escaped_arrayed_identifier simple_arrayed_identifier 3. NO CHANGE TO name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_udp_instance ::= udp_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] (#244 proposes to change name_of_instance to name_of_module_instance) Shalom Brad Pierce wrote: > Issue SV-BV-19-24 is not directly related to the ETF issues > that are associated with it in the spreadsheet. > > In the V2K BNF -- > > name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] > > but in the SV BNF -- > > name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier { range } > > However in both BNFs > > module_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier > arrayed_identifier ::= simple_arrayed_identifier > | escaped_arrayed_identifier > simple_arrayed_identifier ::= simple_identifier [ range ] > escaped_arrayed_identifier ::= escaped_identifier [ range ] > > So in SV the token "module_instance_identifier" does not > always parse the range when reducing the "arrayed_identifier" > token. > > There is a definitely a problem to resolve here though, because > it does do so when there are fewer than two dimensions. > > Also, in both V2K and SV, the nonterminals module_instance_identifier, > arrayed_identifer, etc. are very oddly named, because such an "identifier" > may denote an array of module instances. > > Thus, if "m[7:0]" is an array of module instances, then neither "m" nor > "m[2]" is a module_instance_identifier, while "m[7:0]" is. > > Likewise for "module_instance". > > A sensible renaming of these nonterminals would make the BNF > a lot easier to understand. For example, instead of "module_instance", > perhaps "module_instance_array". > > -- Brad From: "Brad Pierce" <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com> To: "Shalom Bresticker" <Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com> Cc: <etf-bugs@boyd.com> Subject: RE: errata/200: [sv-bc] SV-BC-19-24 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 08:44:51 -0800 Shalom, Yes, good proposal! -- Brad -----Original Message----- From: shalom@pobox3.mot.com [mailto:shalom@pobox3.mot.com]On Behalf Of Shalom Bresticker Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 11:50 PM To: Brad.Pierce@synopsys.COM Cc: etf-bugs@boyd.com Subject: Re: errata/200: [sv-bc] SV-BC-19-24 Brad, Would you prefer the following proposal to ETF #200 instead of the current proposal? 1. CHANGE gate_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier udp_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier module_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier TO gate_instance_identifier ::= identifier udp_instance_identifier ::= identifier module_instance_identifier ::= identifier 2. DELETE arrayed_identifier escaped_arrayed_identifier simple_arrayed_identifier 3. NO CHANGE TO name_of_gate_instance ::= gate_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_udp_instance ::= udp_instance_identifier [ range ] name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] (#244 proposes to change name_of_instance to name_of_module_instance) Shalom Brad Pierce wrote: > Issue SV-BV-19-24 is not directly related to the ETF issues > that are associated with it in the spreadsheet. > > In the V2K BNF -- > > name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier [ range ] > > but in the SV BNF -- > > name_of_instance ::= module_instance_identifier { range } > > However in both BNFs > > module_instance_identifier ::= arrayed_identifier > arrayed_identifier ::= simple_arrayed_identifier > | escaped_arrayed_identifier > simple_arrayed_identifier ::= simple_identifier [ range ] > escaped_arrayed_identifier ::= escaped_identifier [ range ] > > So in SV the token "module_instance_identifier" does not > always parse the range when reducing the "arrayed_identifier" > token. > > There is a definitely a problem to resolve here though, because > it does do so when there are fewer than two dimensions. > > Also, in both V2K and SV, the nonterminals module_instance_identifier, > arrayed_identifer, etc. are very oddly named, because such an "identifier" > may denote an array of module instances. > > Thus, if "m[7:0]" is an array of module instances, then neither "m" nor > "m[2]" is a module_instance_identifier, while "m[7:0]" is. > > Likewise for "module_instance". > > A sensible renaming of these nonterminals would make the BNF > a lot easier to understand. For example, instead of "module_instance", > perhaps "module_instance_array". > > -- Brad |
| Unformatted |
|
Hosted by Boyd Technology