www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-TCPREMOTEIP: | 63.119.35.194 |
X-Authenticated-UID: | jpd AT noqsi DOT com |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) |
Subject: | Re: [geda-user] Buttons for automation (obligatory grab at our shared 3rd rail) Re: [geda-user] Antifork |
From: | John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> |
In-Reply-To: | <DUB125-W46D6798DBF674B80F24208C6620@phx.gbl> |
Date: | Mon, 24 Aug 2015 19:36:28 -0400 |
Message-Id: | <6B8DDCCF-0E84-43DC-94A3-89CE0E56F0ED@noqsi.com> |
References: | <CAM2RGhTJ-gywb3LrkKoNKUxkwJCTsJ7vRxiLtmrXa5Mnp0331w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508240615180 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <CAM2RGhQxGUjCUZof2Ef68gAUNFgHypbGenx6gedB=tdvVqrBiQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <55DB923F DOT 1060807 AT jump-ing DOT de>,<176EF6F6-264E-4F66-A52E-D9A3C3442B91 AT noqsi DOT com> <DUB125-W46D6798DBF674B80F24208C6620 AT phx DOT gbl> |
To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailer: | Apple Mail (2.1878.6) |
X-MIME-Autoconverted: | from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t7ONacXC031804 |
Reply-To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Aug 24, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Hannu Vuolasaho (vuokko AT msn DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote: > How about something like this: > > Allow from .gschembuttonsdefinitionfile or gafrc to define guile > function which would equivalently do T U replace all this page diagonal. > Or run make doc. Let CTRL-ALT-Shift-number execute that button. Both > in my workflow are repeating actions. > > If there isn't such definitions then there are no buttons. > > Soon there would be some functions in gedasymbols. Evolution would > gather the good parts and bad would be forgotten. Some might even get > to gschem tree to be easily enabled. By default there would be the standard > tool. Yes. That’s constructive. Bare-bones simplicity out of the box, opt-in complexity. That’s the way a lot of excellent software (Python, LaTeX, …) works. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ jpd AT noqsi DOT com
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |