Subject: RE: Accellera VFV property language final vote results
From: Sandeep K. Shukla (skshukla@ics.uci.edu)
Date: Sun Apr 21 2002 - 23:21:15 PDT
I find it interesting that the design companies (Intel, Motorola, Sun,
ST) chose CBV, whereas the EDA vendors chose Sugar! Why this dichotomy?
Any explanation?
Dr. Sandeep K. Shukla
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~skshukla
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vfv@eda.org [mailto:owner-vfv@eda.org] On Behalf Of Harry
Foster
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 10:18 PM
To: vfv@eda.org
Subject: Accellera VFV property language final vote results
The committee has demonstrated solid support and
selected Sugar.
Eligible Accellera voting member results:
CBV Sugar Company
==== ===== =======
1 0-In
1 Cadence
1 Co-Design
1 Galileo
1 IBM
1 Intel
1 Motorola
1 Novas
1 ST
1 Sun
1 Synopsys
1 TransEDA
1 Verisity
1 Verplex
---- -----
4 10 (~71.4% in favor of Sugar)
FYI--eligible Non-Accellera member tie-breaking vote
results were: 1-CBV, 3-Sugar
This is a major milestone for the committee.
Selecting a single language from four excellent
candidates has been a difficult task. However,
I'm encouraged by the solid support in the final
round of voting.
During our Wednesday meeting we can discuss the
committee's next steps and goals moving forward.
I have some aggressive short term goals that I'm
confident we can accomplish.
Next Meeting:
============
Date: Wednesday April 24
Time: 9:00am PT.
Domestic Dial-In #: 888-621-9228
Intl Dial-In #: 212-485-8161
Room #: *9724231659*
Best regards,
-Harry
---------------------------------------------------------
Harry Foster Tel 972-423-3186
Chief Architect Cell 408-464-6406
Verplex Systems, Inc. mailto:harry@verplex.com
300 Montague Expwy, Suite 100 www.verplex.com
Milpitas, CA 95035 www.verifiableRTL.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Apr 21 2002 - 23:23:36 PDT