Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarApr2017

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search

Messages from 25000

Article: 25000
Subject: Re: run time doubled with Xilinx 3.1i upgrade
From: Bret Wade <bret.wade@xilinx.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:43:56 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello David,

The test case you provided to the hotline has been investigated and it was
found that the I/O registers all had IOB=FALSE attributes on them. This
mapping directive takes precedence over use of the "-pr b" command line
switch. This explains why none of the registers were mapped to IOBs. The 2.1i
SP6 behavior was also checked and found to be the same. The 4K mapper does
not support the IOB attribute which explains why the registers were mapped to
IOBs when you targeted a Spartan device (instead of Spartan-II). I suggest
that you investigate the source of the IOB=FALSE attributes in the front end
tool.

BTW, there was an I/O register packing bug in the original release of 3.1i
that affected certain configurations. It was fixed in the first 3.1i service
pack.

Regards,
Bret Wade
Xilinx Product Applications

David Kessner wrote:

> rickman wrote:
> > I am not trying to be dense, but why can't you go back to the 2.1 tools
> > if this is holding up your project?
>
> If Xilinx doesn't resolve this issue within the next day or two
> then I will return to 2.1i.  As will many other Xilinx users, I'm
> sure.
>
> Take a look at the following code:
>
>         entity test is
>           port (reset   :in    std_logic;
>                 clk     :in    std_logic;
>                 din     :in    std_logic_vector (7 downto 0);
>                 dout    :out   std_logic_vector (7 downto 0)
>                );
>         end test;
>
>         architecture arch_test of test is
>           signal a      :std_logic_vector (din'range);
>           signal b      :std_logic_vector (din'range);
>           signal c      :std_logic_vector (din'range);
>         begin
>           process (reset, clk)
>           begin
>             if reset='1' then
>               a <= (others=>'0');
>               b <= (others=>'0');
>               c <= (others=>'0');
>             elsif clk'event and clk='1' then
>               a <= din;
>               b <= a;
>               c <= b;
>             end if;
>           end process;
>
>           dout <= c;
>         end arch_test;
>
> Essentially there are three 8-bit wide registers.  The tools should
> place two of these registers in the IOB's.  When compiling for a
> 5 volt Spartan it does.  But when compiling for Spartan-II or Virtex
> it will not use the IOFF's.
>
> I can't speak for everyone, but I can say that _ALL_ of my designs
> do something similar to the above code so _ALL_ my my designs would
> have problems with 3.1i.  It would be a safe guess that at least a
> significant percentage of the FPGA designers out there would also
> have problems.  It's <insert your favorite verb> that this type of
> bug wasn't found by Xilinx's own internal test suite and/or QA
> department.
>
> David Kessner
> davidk@free-ip.com

Article: 25001
Subject: Re: run time doubled with Xilinx 3.1i upgrade
From: David Kessner <davidk@free-ip.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:59:36 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
bob_42690@my-deja.com wrote:
> David,
>   When I looked at 3.1i for virtex under implementation, option,
> optimize and map, in program options, there was a choice pack  I/O
> registers into IOB's for Inputs, outputs, both or none.  The default on
> my set-up is none.  Have you tried this, or are you saying it does not
> work?

That option doesn't have any impact on what I'm experiencing.  Here's
part of a short message that someone from Xilinx sent me just 
minutes ago:

	The test case you provided to the hotline has been 
	investigated and it was found that the I/O registers
	all had IOB=FALSE attributes on them. This mapping directive
	takes precedence over use of the "-pr b" command line switch.
	This explains why none of the registers were mapped to IOBs. 

The "-pr b" mentioned is the same thing as the option you mentioned,
just the command line version of that option.  

I looked at the EDIF netlist and it sure does set the IOB attribute
to false.  The next question is, Why?  I didn't tell it to be false.
I guess there is more detective work to be done.

The guy from Xilinx also said that this is unrelated to the other
IOB bug that was fixed in SP2 (paraphrased).

David Kessner
davidk@free-ip.com
Article: 25002
Subject: Re: Looks like Xilinx is at it again!
From: Andy Peters <"apeters <"@> n o a o [.] e d u>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:06:36 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"S. Ramirez" wrote:
> 
> You guys should talk to the Xilinx FAE about this.  He can straighten it out
> in a femtosecond or two.

Problem solved.  Apparently, Xilinx thought that I'm in the University
Program because I have ".edu" as the TLD of our domain!

Of course, they have not rejected the checks for the maintenance that we
send them every year.

-- a
----------------------------
Andy Peters
Sr. Electrical Engineer
National Optical Astronomy Observatory
950 N Cherry Ave
Tucson, AZ 85719
apeters (at) n o a o [dot] e d u
Article: 25003
Subject: Re: Looks like Xilinx is at it again!
From: Andy Peters <"apeters <"@> n o a o [.] e d u>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:08:07 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
rickman wrote:
> 
> I don't mean to nitpick, but I would like to request that you do
> something with your posting software to wrap your lines at some
> reasonable length such as 70 or 80 characters. Your post is very hard to
> read with all the horizontal scrolling required.

Rick,

Perhaps your newsreader can wrap the lines for you?

-- a
----------------------------
Andy Peters
Sr. Electrical Engineer
National Optical Astronomy Observatory
950 N Cherry Ave
Tucson, AZ 85719
apeters (at) n o a o [dot] e d u
Article: 25004
Subject: Re: Mealy vs Moore FSM model
From: rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:06:22 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Marc Klingelhofer wrote:
> By the way, Rickman (since I know you read all of these posts), I hope you
> appreciate that I formatted
> this email to fit within your viewer's constraints. I know I wasn't the
> poster to whom you were referring,
> but I understand your issue. Indeed, I had the same problem with Alliance
> 2.1i: I have a number of
> pulldowns on IOs and the translater's output log (I use Design Manager)
> concatenated all of the messages
> into one line:
> 
> Added a PULLDOWN primitive on net PLB_SCLKAdded a PULLDOWN primitive on net
> PLA_SCLKAdded a PULLDOWN primitive on net PLA_D[13]Added <snipped about 40
> more of these...>
> 
> I must apologize. That previous line wasn't wrapped! :^)
> 
> What newsreader do you use? OE5 wraps lines for me automatically. But it has
> other problems, including
> the OS it comes with.

I use the same (or similar) OS, but I am using Netscape for reading the
newsgroups. Over the generations it seems that they give you less and
less control over the display formatting. I though I used to have
control over the width of the lines that I sent. Now at the top of my
window I can see the tick mark showing the width of the text to be sent.
But I have no control over where it is. As far as I can tell, I have no
control at all over the display of text line widths. 

But I have found that I can read non-wrapped lines if I start a reply
message. The echoed text will then be wrapped in the edit window. 

:-)

-- 

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.



Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design

Arius
4 King Ave
Frederick, MD 21701-3110
301-682-7772 Voice
301-682-7666 FAX

Internet URL http://www.arius.com
Article: 25005
Subject: Re: Looks like Xilinx is at it again!
From: rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:10:42 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Netscape 4.7. I have not found a way other than to open a reply. The
edit window shows the lines wrapped. 

Usually the unwrapped lines are not so long that they can't be read
easily. But this post had quite long lines. 

What is the standard (if there is such a thing for wrapping lines in
messages sent to the newsgroups?


Andy Peters wrote:
> 
> rickman wrote:
> >
> > I don't mean to nitpick, but I would like to request that you do
> > something with your posting software to wrap your lines at some
> > reasonable length such as 70 or 80 characters. Your post is very hard to
> > read with all the horizontal scrolling required.
> 
> Rick,
> 
> Perhaps your newsreader can wrap the lines for you?
> 
> -- a
> ----------------------------
> Andy Peters
> Sr. Electrical Engineer
> National Optical Astronomy Observatory
> 950 N Cherry Ave
> Tucson, AZ 85719
> apeters (at) n o a o [dot] e d u

-- 

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.



Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design

Arius
4 King Ave
Frederick, MD 21701-3110
301-682-7772 Voice
301-682-7666 FAX

Internet URL http://www.arius.com
Article: 25006
Subject: Re: Looks like Xilinx is at it again!
From: rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:13:16 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Opps, I took a harder look at the preferences and found that it will
wrap lines on messages. I think I turned if off because I was getting a
lot of messages that were wrapping one word from a line onto the next
line. This is as annoying as the really long lines. 

I also found the control for the outgoing line wrapping width...

:-)


Andy Peters wrote:
> 
> rickman wrote:
> >
> > I don't mean to nitpick, but I would like to request that you do
> > something with your posting software to wrap your lines at some
> > reasonable length such as 70 or 80 characters. Your post is very hard to
> > read with all the horizontal scrolling required.
> 
> Rick,
> 
> Perhaps your newsreader can wrap the lines for you?
> 
> -- a
> ----------------------------
> Andy Peters
> Sr. Electrical Engineer
> National Optical Astronomy Observatory
> 950 N Cherry Ave
> Tucson, AZ 85719
> apeters (at) n o a o [dot] e d u

-- 

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.



Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design

Arius
4 King Ave
Frederick, MD 21701-3110
301-682-7772 Voice
301-682-7666 FAX

Internet URL http://www.arius.com
Article: 25007
Subject: Re: run time doubled with Xilinx 3.1i upgrade
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 19:24:17 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>


David Kessner wrote:
> 
> Dan Kuechle wrote:
> > My Virtex 400 design that placed and routed in 2 - 2.5 hours with 2.1i
> > (on a 350 mhz PC) is now taking 4 - 5 hours with 3.1i (with service pack
> > 2 installed).  The routing delays and timing look no better or no worst
> > than 2.1i.
> > Is anyone else seeing these longer run times?
> 
> I've seen multiple problems with 3.1i that I'm still trying to sort
> out.  Some of the problems are:
> 
>         - FF's not being put into IOB's when F2.1i successfully put
>           them there (Spartan-II).  This was not fixed with SP2.

Mine works just fine.  Are you setting the use IOBs false in with the PAR switch
or in your synthesis tool?  If you have IOB=false in the edif it ain't the
xilinx tools doing it to you.


>         - More logic resources being taken up (separate than what
>           was covered in one of their "Answers" Database).

That would generally be a synthesis thing, not a mapper thing, although the
mapper reports a slice used even if only part of it is used.  perhaps the design
has been spread out a little more?

>         - PAR times 2 to 4 times longer.
Haven't seen this either.  I wouldn't say it is much faster, but I also havent
seen anything to indicate it is any slower.  Have you tried floorplanning?


> 
> The first one is amusing, since it is very obvious but somehow
> slipped through their QA.  Unfortunately that's where the amusement
> ends.  I have a project that is in limbo because of that bug.  I've
> been trying to create a work-around, but it is difficult given the
> much longer PAR times (1 hour vs 15 minutes).
> 
> David Kessner
> davidk@free-ip.com

-- 
-Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
email ray@andraka.com  
http://www.andraka.com  or http://www.fpga-guru.com
Article: 25008
Subject: Re: run time doubled with Xilinx 3.1i upgrade
From: David Kessner <davidk@free-ip.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:28:20 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Ray Andraka wrote:
> >         - FF's not being put into IOB's when F2.1i successfully put
> >           them there (Spartan-II).  This was not fixed with SP2.
> 
> Mine works just fine.  Are you setting the use IOBs false in with the PAR switch
> or in your synthesis tool?  If you have IOB=false in the edif it ain't the
> xilinx tools doing it to you.

It seems that FPGA Express, in this version at least, defaults 
to IOB=false.  In the previous version it would default to "none".
This is the source of my troubles.  Changing it to TRUE fixes 
everything.  Now my problem is how to set it to TRUE from a 
makefile and not the Xilinx Project Manager...



David Kessner
davidk@free-ip.com
Article: 25009
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: Darin Johnson <darin@usa.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 21:34:24 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com> writes:

> I can see the potential need for all of these things even if I don't
> agree that they should be used for employment screening.

I don't see the need even.  A credit report?  I've heard places
use this, but I can't imagine to what legitimate use it would
be put.  Employability should have nothing to do with finances.
If an interviewee has credit problems, so what?

Of course, illegitimate uses exist - making sure you only hire
managers of the correct social class, etc.

Same for generic "background" information.  It's nice for keeping
the old-boy network alive.

And I can't believe people still think drug testing is reliable.
Article: 25010
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: Paul Tiseo <tiseo.paul@mayo.edu>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:53:10 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <39A3E96B.D6828DAD@pacbell.net>, n_nelson@pacbell.net says... 
> A meteorite may strike any one of us dead today, but we do not worry
> about it.

	Yes, but the odds of a company that is draconic about its 
treatement of individuals creating havoc in someone's life is much 
larger than that of a meteorite falling on one's head. Your example is 
inappropriate, especially from a statistical POV.

	In reading your various post, you seem to take an apathetic 
attitude towards what should be a relationship of mututal respect. At 
the start of any relationship, a healthy amount of doubt should be used, 
but some companies go over the top.

	 Basically, you have a lot of big words and windy sentences that 
leave me with the impression that you are saying: "Why should I bother 
to care about an NDA or any other invasive processes that a company 
forces upon me since they won't be used to my detriment now?"

	If you can't envisage a future situation wherein these overbearing 
actions can result in bad experiences for you, whether through stupidity 
or malice on the other's part, then you might as well stop arguing with 
someone like Jon who's apparently had something like that happen to him.

____________________________________________________
Paul Tiseo, Intermediate Systems Programmer
Birdsall 3, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville
4500 San Pablo Rd, FL, 32224
tiseo.paul@mayo.edu -- (904) 953-8254
Article: 25011
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: Darin Johnson <darin@usa.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:11:00 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com> writes:

> For a background check by a private investigator! The investigating
> company is PROFILES PLUS, INC.

Hmm, I remember having to sign something similar for my current
job.  I had forgotten about it.  I remember that it took quite long
time to get my official offer (I had authorized this after the
unofficial offer).  It turns out, the investigating company could
not determine that I had actually gone to college!!  Pretty inept
it seems.  The employer finally decided to stop waiting for a reply
and hired me anyway.

When I signed it, I was told it was for verifying the facts in my
resume and application; and I seem to recall that it didn't have a
blanket "investigate everything" feel to it.  But what do you do?
Don't sign, no job; versus sign and some bureaucratic HR person I will
never see is happy.  Or argue with a lawyer to change the terms, and
start off my first day with an earned reputation of being a trouble
maker and a risk.

On the other hand, from my view, none of these things are near as bad
as an employment agreement that says you can be fired "at will" with
no reason given.  Yeah, they're just extra flexibility for the company
(ie, more power for them), but still...  What's worse, a VP who
dislikes you who then goes out and gets a credit report to justify
firing you, or the same VP firing who doesn't need any excuse at all?

The tricky part is that if you don't get the job, or get fired, it may
be because of information the company is not legally allowed to use in
its decision making; yet how do you find that out or prove it?
(beware of arbitration agreements that prevent fair legal recourse)

> 2) they did not acknowledge that a drug test can be wrong. It can be
> wrong for a large number of reasons; poppy seeds (yes that is true),
> prescription drugs, and many "medicinal" herbs sold in health food
> stores.

Of course, what happens is that a DOD contractor has to prove they
are a drug free workplace.  Doing that in practice is extremely
difficult.  How do you prove it?  The cheap and hassle-free way (for
them) is to do drug testing.  Any other solution is an enormous burden
for them.

Thus, when a single person, or a small minority, object to this
testing, it doesn't matter.  It's better that they don't hire this
person than having to change all their policies and institute a *real*
drug-free workplace policy.  And of course they can't make exceptions,
because they told the government that they wouldn't.

Thus, no exceptions.  And of course no recourse, because the policy
implementers are just bureaucrats you'll never see, and your hiring
manager will never see.

However, I did work at Lockheed without having a drug test, even
though there was a company wide drug testing policy for new hires.
Apparently the nurse was gone the day I had my physical (that was
*wierd*, what were they going to do, not hire me because I wasn't
healthy?); so they skipped the drug test that day, and they never
called back.

> 3) to make sure that I could not dispute the result of the test it was
> given at the interview so that if it was failed they would simply not
> make an offer. You would never know that you failed the drug test.

I find it disturbing that you typically never know why you didn't get
a job.  After several months of a job search (ultimately, eleven
months), I was disturbed to be told finally by an employer that I
didn't get the job because "we didn't feel you really wanted the job".
It came out that my body language, speaking style, and overall
shy/formal attitude was working against me.  If I had known this much
earlier on...

After I started consciously remembering to be more animated, and
"acting" during the interview instead of being myself, I started
getting much better responses...  Of course, there were still the
"we do want to hire you, but we just had our budgets slashed"...
Article: 25012
Subject: Re: run time doubled with Xilinx 3.1i upgrade
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:58:42 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Synplicity has an easy to get to swithc for the IOBFFs.  I'm not a frequent user
of FPGA express, so I can't help you there.  Best of luck.

David Kessner wrote:
> 
> Ray Andraka wrote:
> > >         - FF's not being put into IOB's when F2.1i successfully put
> > >           them there (Spartan-II).  This was not fixed with SP2.
> >
> > Mine works just fine.  Are you setting the use IOBs false in with the PAR switch
> > or in your synthesis tool?  If you have IOB=false in the edif it ain't the
> > xilinx tools doing it to you.
> 
> It seems that FPGA Express, in this version at least, defaults
> to IOB=false.  In the previous version it would default to "none".
> This is the source of my troubles.  Changing it to TRUE fixes
> everything.  Now my problem is how to set it to TRUE from a
> makefile and not the Xilinx Project Manager...
> 
> David Kessner
> davidk@free-ip.com

-- 
-Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
email ray@andraka.com  
http://www.andraka.com  or http://www.fpga-guru.com
Article: 25013
Subject: Re: xdl documentation
From: Philip Freidin <philip@fliptronics.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:35:51 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:31:50 GMT, eml@riverside-machines.com.NOSPAM wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:09:14 -0700, Philip Freidin
><philip@fliptronics.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Send a request to
>>    xdl_support@xilinx.com
>>
>>On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:19:14 GMT, William Chow <choww@eecg.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>>I'm looking for documentation on the Xilinx xdl file format. I've tried
>>>looking for it off Xilinx's support page. Can't get to it. Can someone
>>>help me out?
>
>I seem to remember this resulting in a response that it wasn't
>supported. You can get the docs by installing the userware option if
>you haven't already done so, and looking for
>$XILINX/userware/doc/xdl.html.
>
>Evan 

Which unfortunately is not part of the 3.1i install

Philip Freidin

Mindspring that acquired Earthlink that acquired Netcom has
decided to kill off all Shell accounts, including mine.

My new primary email address is    philip@fliptronics.com

I'm sure the inconvenience to you will be less than it is for me.
Article: 25014
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: Neil Nelson <n_nelson@pacbell.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 19:45:20 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Paul Tiseo wrote:

> In article <39A3E96B.D6828DAD@pacbell.net>, n_nelson@pacbell.net says...
> > A meteorite may strike any one of us dead today, but we do not worry
> > about it.
>
>         Yes, but the odds of a company that is draconic about its
> treatement of individuals creating havoc in someone's life is much
> larger than that of a meteorite falling on one's head. Your example is
> inappropriate, especially from a statistical POV.
>
>         In reading your various post, you seem to take an apathetic
> attitude towards what should be a relationship of mututal respect. At
> the start of any relationship, a healthy amount of doubt should be used,
> but some companies go over the top.
>
>          Basically, you have a lot of big words and windy sentences that
> leave me with the impression that you are saying: "Why should I bother
> to care about an NDA or any other invasive processes that a company
> forces upon me since they won't be used to my detriment now?"
>
>         If you can't envisage a future situation wherein these overbearing
> actions can result in bad experiences for you, whether through stupidity
> or malice on the other's part, then you might as well stop arguing with
> someone like Jon who's apparently had something like that happen to him.

Jon does look like he needs a break, how about if I argue with you.

Have you had the experience--not envisaged (imagined), as we may
envisage quite at odds with the facts--of some unethical behavior by an
employer in or closely related to the issues we are discussing?  At the
moment we have various vague claims that they happen, but factual details
(as in the name of the company involved, Jon) are conveniently missing.  I
think if we want to have an accurate statistical study, that we take care to
have accurate, credible data with which to make a statistical assertion.
Less
accurate data, we cannot argue for much of anything, large or small.
However, I am not seeing much hard data by the opposition, who should
know since they are the opposition, that there is a large problem, hence I am

concluding that the problem is small.  I.e., if there are those who are
earnestly
looking and they do not find hard data, it is likely that the hard data is
not
there.

No doubt, the previous has too many big words and windy sentences, so let us
try the following.  I give a small jar with a lid to a child and ask the
child to go out
into the yard and collect some ants in the jar.  The child comes back and
relates
to me tales of strange and wondrous ants of innumerable number. And looking
forward to seeing these curious ants for myself, I ask the child for the jar
and
upon seeing it, see that it is empty.  Perhaps the child got carried away
envision-
ing ants and forgot to collect them, or perhaps if the child made any effort
at all
there were no ants to be found.

Now against the general tone of my argument is an article on the front page
of
today's Los Angeles Times titled ``Courts Question Rules Barring Suits by
Workers''.  The article discusses two cases: one before the California
Supreme
Court and one before the U.S. Supreme Court.  There are some juicy passages
in that article that could be used for good effect against my position.  It
is likely
there are web sources for this.

I am quite sure there are a good number of interviewing and other employer
practices that need to be opposed, but we need to oppose them accurately
and effectively.  I am not particularly against or for employers or
employees.  I
am for capable action that solves problems well.  These problems are not
simple, and a lot of work can be done on them.

Regards,

Neil Nelson

P.S.: There may be good arguments for not giving company names but some-
one needs to make them.



Article: 25015
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:11:14 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Neil Nelson wrote:
> No doubt, the previous has too many big words and windy sentences, so let us
> try the following.  I give a small jar with a lid to a child and ask the
> child to go out
> into the yard and collect some ants in the jar.  The child comes back and
> relates
> to me tales of strange and wondrous ants of innumerable number. And looking
> forward to seeing these curious ants for myself, I ask the child for the jar
> and
> upon seeing it, see that it is empty.  Perhaps the child got carried away
> envision-
> ing ants and forgot to collect them, or perhaps if the child made any effort
> at all
> there were no ants to be found.

Neil, you must be a very interesting person to work with.

:)

> P.S.: There may be good arguments for not giving company names but some-
> one needs to make them.

What are you asking company names for? So that we have concrete examples
to work with, or is your point that we should name names to alert others
to the practices of the named employers?


-- 

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.



Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design

Arius
4 King Ave
Frederick, MD 21701-3110
301-682-7772 Voice
301-682-7666 FAX

Internet URL http://www.arius.com
Article: 25016
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: Peter Alfke <palfke@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:05:30 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Can we, please, stop this endless and boring discussion about fine legal
points and paranoia of a few individuals that I mostly never met here
before. This discussion really has no place in a newgroup about computer
architecture fpga.
I just don't know anybody who is interested in this subject.
As I said before, an employer who asks for an NDA in a first-level
interview should have his head examined...
For a contractor this may be a different issue, but I trust that our
contractor friends are savvy enough to handle this.
Of course, this is an unmoderated newsgroup, and the story can go on
forever. Snooze, snooze.

Peter Alfke
=============================================
Darin Johnson wrote:

> rickman <spamgoeshere4@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> > For a background check by a private investigator! The investigating
> > company is PROFILES PLUS, INC.
>
> Hmm, I remember having to sign something similar for my current
> job.  I had forgotten about it.  I remember that it took quite long
> time to get my official offer (I had authorized this after the
> unofficial offer).  It turns out, the investigating company could
> not determine that I had actually gone to college!!  Pretty inept
> it seems.  The employer finally decided to stop waiting for a reply
> and hired me anyway.
>
> When I signed it, I was told it was for verifying the facts in my
> resume and application; and I seem to recall that it didn't have a
> blanket "investigate everything" feel to it.  But what do you do?
> Don't sign, no job; versus sign and some bureaucratic HR person I will
> never see is happy.  Or argue with a lawyer to change the terms, and
> start off my first day with an earned reputation of being a trouble
> maker and a risk.
>
> On the other hand, from my view, none of these things are near as bad
> as an employment agreement that says you can be fired "at will" with
> no reason given.  Yeah, they're just extra flexibility for the company
> (ie, more power for them), but still...  What's worse, a VP who
> dislikes you who then goes out and gets a credit report to justify
> firing you, or the same VP firing who doesn't need any excuse at all?
>
> The tricky part is that if you don't get the job, or get fired, it may
> be because of information the company is not legally allowed to use in
> its decision making; yet how do you find that out or prove it?
> (beware of arbitration agreements that prevent fair legal recourse)
>
> > 2) they did not acknowledge that a drug test can be wrong. It can be
> > wrong for a large number of reasons; poppy seeds (yes that is true),
> > prescription drugs, and many "medicinal" herbs sold in health food
> > stores.
>
> Of course, what happens is that a DOD contractor has to prove they
> are a drug free workplace.  Doing that in practice is extremely
> difficult.  How do you prove it?  The cheap and hassle-free way (for
> them) is to do drug testing.  Any other solution is an enormous burden
> for them.
>
> Thus, when a single person, or a small minority, object to this
> testing, it doesn't matter.  It's better that they don't hire this
> person than having to change all their policies and institute a *real*
> drug-free workplace policy.  And of course they can't make exceptions,
> because they told the government that they wouldn't.
>
> Thus, no exceptions.  And of course no recourse, because the policy
> implementers are just bureaucrats you'll never see, and your hiring
> manager will never see.
>
> However, I did work at Lockheed without having a drug test, even
> though there was a company wide drug testing policy for new hires.
> Apparently the nurse was gone the day I had my physical (that was
> *wierd*, what were they going to do, not hire me because I wasn't
> healthy?); so they skipped the drug test that day, and they never
> called back.
>
> > 3) to make sure that I could not dispute the result of the test it was
> > given at the interview so that if it was failed they would simply not
> > make an offer. You would never know that you failed the drug test.
>
> I find it disturbing that you typically never know why you didn't get
> a job.  After several months of a job search (ultimately, eleven
> months), I was disturbed to be told finally by an employer that I
> didn't get the job because "we didn't feel you really wanted the job".
> It came out that my body language, speaking style, and overall
> shy/formal attitude was working against me.  If I had known this much
> earlier on...
>
> After I started consciously remembering to be more animated, and
> "acting" during the interview instead of being myself, I started
> getting much better responses...  Of course, there were still the
> "we do want to hire you, but we just had our budgets slashed"...

Article: 25017
Subject: Re: run time doubled with Xilinx 3.1i upgrade
From: "Vikram Pasham" <>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:18:35 -0700
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
David,

In the make file you can use 
"set_pad_register" constraint to use IOB registers. The syntax for using this constraint is

set_pad_register TRUE  net_name

You can do a "man" on this constraint in FE_SHELL to get all the details.

Hope this helps.

Vikram

Xilinx Applications
Article: 25018
Subject: minor problem with 3.1i was (Re: run time doubled)
From: Andreas Doering <doering@iti.mu-luebeck.de>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:15:03 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
We noticed that FPGA-editor did not work with some 
16-Bit X-Servers (Linux, remote execution on a Solaris box).
It works fine with 8-Bit and 24-Bit.
Andreas

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                        Andreas C. Doering
                        Medizinische Universitaet zu Luebeck
                        Institut fuer Technische Informatik
                        Ratzeburger Allee 160
                        D-23538 Luebeck Germany
		        Tel.: +49 451 500-3741, Fax: -3687
		        Email: doering@iti.mu-luebeck.de
                        Home: http://www.iti.mu-luebeck.de/~doering 
"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of ... science" (Proverbs 1.7)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Article: 25019
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: peb@amleth.demon.co.uk ("Paul E. Bennett")
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 00 07:33:17 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <39A49F03.2573490C@earthlink.net>
           palfke@earthlink.net "Peter Alfke" writes:

> Can we, please, stop this endless and boring discussion about fine legal
> points and paranoia of a few individuals that I mostly never met here
> before. This discussion really has no place in a newgroup about computer
> architecture fpga.

It has to do embedded systems more and more these days. It is essentially 
about the protection and correct attributation of Intellectual Property
that goes to make up the knowledge behind it.

> I just don't know anybody who is interested in this subject.
> As I said before, an employer who asks for an NDA in a first-level
> interview should have his head examined...

As I said, I am just 3 miles from an establishment where you will sign an 
NDA just to visit them (and to break the agreement is at this place is 
considered a treasonable act - carrying very stiff penalties). Their 
wording, though, is very fair to both parties.

> For a contractor this may be a different issue, but I trust that our
> contractor friends are savvy enough to handle this.

I think we are but the issue affects all of us.

> Of course, this is an unmoderated newsgroup, and the story can go on
> forever. Snooze, snooze.

You don't have to read it. 

-- 
********************************************************************
Paul E. Bennett ....................<email://peb@amleth.demon.co.uk>
Forth based HIDECS Consultancy .....<http://www.amleth.demon.co.uk/>
Mob: +44 (0)7811-639972 .........NOW AVAILABLE:- HIDECS COURSE......
Tel: +44 (0)1235-814586 .... see http://www.feabhas.com for details.
Going Forth Safely ..... EBA. www.electric-boat-association.org.uk..
********************************************************************

Article: 25020
Subject: CHANGE $6 INTO $3500
From: rbowoo@aol.com (RBowoo)
Date: 24 Aug 2000 08:13:28 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
NO LIE!! MAKE LOT$ OF MONEY RISK FREE!! ALL YOU NEED IS READ..
Message posted by TRYA ( <mailto:>) on Friday, June 25 at 02:00 PM EDT 
Message: 
MAKE LOTS OF MONEY Thursday, 17-Jun-1999 16:12:14 205.188.197.178 writes: THIS
TIP WILL BLOW YOU AWAY******** I found this on a bulletin board and decided to
try it. A little while back, I was browsing through newsgroups, just like you
are now, and came across an article similar to this that said you could make
thousands of dollars within weeks with only an initial investment of $6.00! So
I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but like most of us, I was
curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send $1.00 to each of the
6 names and address stated in the article. You then place your own name and
address in the bottom of the list at #6, and post the article in at least 200
newsgroups. (There are thousands) No catch, that was it. So after thinking it
over, and talking to a few people first, I thought about trying it. I figured:
"what have I got to lose except 6 stamps and $6.00, right? "Then I invested the
measly $6.00, Well GUESS WHAT!?...within 7 days, I started getting money in the
mail! I was shocked! I figured it would end soon, but the money just kept
coming in. In my first week, I made about $25.00. By the end of the second
week, I had made a total of over $1000.00! In the third week, I had over
$10,000.00 and it's still growing. This is now my fourth week, I have made a
total of just over $42,000.00, and it's still coming in rapidly. It's certainly
worth $6.00, and 6 stamps, I have spent more than that on the lottery!! Let me
tell you how this works and most importantly, WHY it works. Also, make sure you
print a copy of this article NOW, so you Can get the information off of it as
you need it. I promise you that if you follow the directions exactly, that you
will start making more money than you thought possible by doing something so
easy! Suggestion: Read this entire message carefully! (Print it out or download
it.) Follow the simple directions and watch the money come in! It's easy. It's
legal. And, our investment is only $6.00 (Plus postage)
	 IMPORTANT: This is not a rip-off, it is not indecent; it is not illegal; and
it is 99% no risk - it really works! If all of the Following instructions are
adhered to, you will receive extraordinary dividends. PLEASE NOTE: Please
follow these directions EXACTLY, and $50,000.00 or more can be yours in 20 to
60 days. This program remains successful because of the honesty and integrity
of the participants. Please continue its success by carefully adhering to the
instructions. You will now become part of the Mail Order business. In this
business, your product is not solid and tangible, it's a service. You are in
the business of developing Mailing Lists. Many large corporations are happy to
pay big Bucks for quality lists. However, the money made from the Mailing lists
is secondary to the income which is made from People like you and me asking to
be included in that list. Here are the 4 easy steps to success:
	
 STEP 1: Get 6 separate pieces of paper and write the following on each piece
of paper "PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST." Now get 6 US $1.00 bills and
place ONE inside EACH of the 6 pieces of paper so the bill will not be seen
through the envelope (to prevent (thievery). Next, place one paper in each of
the envelopes and seal them. You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with
a piece of paper stating the above phrase, your name and address, and a $1.00
bill. What you are doing is creating a service. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! You
are requesting a legitimate service and you are paying for it! Like most of us
I was a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it
all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office 1-800-725-2161) and they
confirmed that it is indeed legal. Mail the 6 envelopes to the following
address:

 (#1) Authur Smith 4118 Linnfield Houston, TX 77016(#2) Micheal Kayman 1875
43RD Ave SF, CA 94122 (#3) Rich White 216 Old Timberlake Rd. Apt 305 Lynchburg
VA 2450(#4) Joey Knowles RT.1 Box 358 Montgomery AL, 36105(#5) Satryo Winanto
1825 County Rd F East White Bear Lake, MN 55110(#5)Randy Bowoo 962 Trojan Ave
San Leandro, CA 94579.

 STEP 2: Now take the #1 name off the list that you see above, move The other
names up (6 becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc...) and Add YOUR Name as number 6 on
the list. STEP 3: Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article as
close to original as possible. Now, post your amended article to at least 200
newsgroups. (I think there are close to 24,000 groups) All you need is 200, but
remember, the more you post, the more money YOU make! You won't get very much
unless you post like crazy. =) This is perfectly legal! If you have any doubts,
refer to Title 18 Sec. 1302 & 1341 of the Postal lottery laws. Keep a copy of
these steps for yourself and, whenever you need money, you can use it again,
and again. PLEASE REMEMBER that this program remains successful because of the
honesty and integrity of the participants and by their carefully adhering to
the directions. Look at it this way. If you are of integrity, the program will
continue and the money that so many others have received will come your way.
NOTE: You may want to retain every name and address sent to you, either on a
computer or hard copy and keep the notes people send you. This VERIFIES that
you are truly providing a service. (Also, it might be a good idea to wrap the
$1 bill in dark paper to reduce the risk of mail theft.) So, as each post is
downloaded and the directions carefully followed, six members will be
reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer with one dollar each.
Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when your name reaches
the #1 position you will be receiving thousands of dollars in CASH!!! What an
opportunity for only $6.00 ($1.00 for each of the first six people listed
above) Send it now, add your own name to the list and you're in business! 
-DIRECTIONS----FOR HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS---------Step1) You do not need to
re-type this entire letter to do your own posting. Simply put your cursor at
the beginning of this letter, drag your cursor to the bottom of this document,
and select 'copy' from the edit menu. This will copy the entire letter into the
computer's memory. Step 2) Open a blank 'notepad' file and place your cursor at
the top of the blank page. From the 'edit' menu select 'paste'. This will past
a copy of the letter into notepad so that you can add your name to the list.
Step 3) Save your new notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do your
postings in different settings, you'll always have this file to go back to.
Step 4) Use Netscape or Internet explorer and try searching For various
newsgroups (on-line forums, message boards, chat sites, discussions.) Step 5)
Visit these message boards and post this article as a new message by
highlighting the text of this letter and selecting paste from the edit menu.
Fill in the Subject, which will be the header that everyone sees as they Scroll
through the list of postings, in a particular group. Click the post message
button. You're done with your first one! Congratulations:) THAT'S IT! All you
have to do is Jump to different newsgroups and post away, after you get the
hang of it, it will take about 30 seconds for each newsgroup! **REMEMBER, THE
MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST IN, THE MORE MONEY YOU WILL MAKE! BUT : YOU HAVE TO
POST A MINIMUM OF 200** That's it! You will Begin receiving money from around
the world within days! You may eventually want to rent a P.O. Box due to the
large amount of mail you will receive. If you wish to stay anonymous, you can
invent a name to use, as long as the postman will deliver it. **JUST MAKE SURE
ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT. **Now, each of the 5 persons who just sent me
$1.00 make the MINIMUM 200 postings, each with my name at #5 and only 5 persons
respond to each of the original 5, that is another $25.00 for me, now those 25
each make 200 MINIMUM posts with my name at #4 and only 5 replies each, I will
bring in an additional $125.00! Now, those 125 persons turn around and post the
MINIMUM 200 with my name at #3 and only receive 5 replies each, I will make an
additional $625.00! OK, now here is the fun part, each of those 625 persons
post a MINIMUM 200 letters with my name at #2 and they each only receive 5
replies, that just made me $3,125.00!!!Those 3,125 persons will all deliver
this message to 200 newsgroups with my name at #1 and if still 5 persons per
200 newsgroups react I will receive $15,625.00! With an original investment of
only $6.00! AMAZING! When your name is no longer on the list, you just take the
latest postings in the newsgroups, and send out another $6.00 to names on the
list, putting your name at number 6 again. And start posting again. The thing
to remember is: do you realize that thousands of people all over the world are
joining the internet and reading these articles everyday?, JUST LIKE YOU are
now!!
	 So, can you afford $6.00 and see if it really works?? I think so... People
have said, "what if the plan is played out and no one sends you the money? So
what! What are the chances of that happening when there are tons of new honest
users and new honest people who are joining the internet and newsgroups
everyday and are willing to give it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000
new users, everyday, with thousands of those joining the actual internet.
REMEMBER, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work. The possibilities
can be endless...You will never know, unless you give it a try... otherwise, it
will always be "what if"... "GOOD LUCK" =) 

Article: 25021
Subject: Re: Permanently programming FPGAs
From: "Olaf Birkeland" <Olaf_Birkeland@coldmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:22:57 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

"rk" wrote:
> Olaf Birkeland wrote:
[snip]
> > In retrospect, I would have preferred to avoid the sockets. But it was
not
> > too appealing to solder an expensive FPGA to an untested prototype card.
(I
> > didn't have access to a BGA reballing service at that time.......)
>
> Thanks for the story.  The socket that I have on the board didn't require
any
> soldering at all; it had 4 screws, if I remember correctly, and was a
press
> fit.  I don't recall the manufacturer's name off hand but I can look it
up.

I'm going to try some similar sockets for my current prototypes (different
project) with a 0.8 mm pitch BGA. They're from Loranger (www.loranger.com).
The socket is attached to the PCB by four screws, where the sockets pads are
tiny springs that will make contact to the PCB pads. Not really press fit
though, as there is no hole in the pads (unless you'll need a micro-via in
the center to break out the signals on another layer) Don't have any
experience on the reliability yet, but I can recommend Loranger otherwise.
Sockets was delivered in 3 weeks and their price was quite good compared to
others.

>
> For the case of the BGA560, was the socket or the package out of spec?  Or
were
> the specs not fully consistent?

The fault was in the socket. As this was 1+ year ago, I got units from very
early production. After talking to the socket vendor, they found out that
they had a bit larger shrinkage in the plastic molding process than
expected. Should thus probably be ok now.....

Loranger on the other hand, required a mechanical sample of the package when
ordering to be sure that it would fit. Worked OK in my case as I had
dummies, but could be less attractive if you're using an expensive chip
that's not been used before. Wonder if FPGA vendors also can provide
mechanical dummies?? Guess Peter would recommend buying the smallest package
compatible device.... ;-)

Regards,
- Olaf



Article: 25022
Subject: Virtex partial reconfiguration feature (?)
From: "mok" <mok_3001@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:37:16 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In a Xilinx application note, it is said that Virtex series have a column
oriented partial reconfiguration feature. Does that mean that configuration
data is shifted column by column until it reaches the desired column. Does
that mean that if you wanna dynamically reconfigure a particular logic in
Column 'N', you have to keep all 'N-1' columns that come before column N,
empty???


Article: 25023
Subject: Re: Virtex partial reconfiguration feature (?)
From: "Bill Blyth" <bb@alphadata.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:11:33 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Basically no. It is column replacement rather than shift.

See XAPP138 & 151 which explain this in some detail.


"mok" <mok_3001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8o30us$dlj$1@news.qub.ac.uk...
> In a Xilinx application note, it is said that Virtex series have a column
> oriented partial reconfiguration feature. Does that mean that
configuration
> data is shifted column by column until it reaches the desired column. Does
> that mean that if you wanna dynamically reconfigure a particular logic in
> Column 'N', you have to keep all 'N-1' columns that come before column N,
> empty???
>
>


Article: 25024
Subject: Re: Non-disclosures in job interviews, Round Two
From: Paul Tiseo <tiseo.paul@mayo.edu>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:25:08 -0400
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
In article <39A48C40.2345C315@pacbell.net>, n_nelson@pacbell.net says...
> Paul Tiseo wrote:
> 
> > In article <39A3E96B.D6828DAD@pacbell.net>, n_nelson@pacbell.net says...
> > > A meteorite may strike any one of us dead today, but we do not worry
> > > about it.
> >
> >         Yes, but the odds of a company that is draconic about its
> > treatement of individuals creating havoc in someone's life is much
> > larger than that of a meteorite falling on one's head. Your example is
> > inappropriate, especially from a statistical POV.
[...]
> Jon does look like he needs a break, how about if I argue with you.

	Well, I am too busy these days for a long, drawn-out discussion in 
a newsgroup, but thanks for the heads-up. :)
 
> Have you had the experience--not envisaged (imagined), as we may
> envisage quite at odds with the facts--of some unethical behavior by an
> employer in or closely related to the issues we are discussing?  At the

	Yes, but I am not at liberty to discuss them in the excruciating 
details you seem to require. :)

> moment we have various vague claims that they happen, but factual details
> (as in the name of the company involved, Jon) are conveniently missing.  I
> think if we want to have an accurate statistical study, that we take care to
> have accurate, credible data with which to make a statistical assertion.

	Sure, but my assertion was that you are *appear* to be minimizing 
the actual *and* potential harm done by companies that do just what many 
are discussing in this thread. Comparisons to meteorites do not hide the 
fact that, unless there is an equal and opposing force to corporate mass 
paranoia and subsequent measures, that we could potentially suffer much 
more than some of us already do. It really was just my impression of 
your tone that I was relating, not a statement on the accuracy of 
inaccuracy of your statements.

[ant-collecting example]
> upon seeing it, see that it is empty.  Perhaps the child got carried away
> envisioning ants and forgot to collect them, or perhaps if the child made
> any effort at all there were no ants to be found.

	I see what you are getting at and agree. People in newsgroup and 
USENET in general simply might not have the right "jar" to be collecting 
the "ants". :)
 
____________________________________________________
Paul Tiseo, Intermediate Systems Programmer
Birdsall 3, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville
4500 San Pablo Rd, FL, 32224
tiseo.paul@mayo.edu -- (904) 953-8254


Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarApr2017

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search