Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/08/25/13:47:37
John Doty wrote:
> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:50 AM, myken<myken AT iae DOT nl> wrote:
>
>
>> On 25/08/15 14:25, John Doty wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps not so much you, but much of the “let’s make gschem better” that I see here is really “let’s make gschem more like pcb”. And, of course, the reason I find pcb such a horror is that it is not like gschem in its design.
>>>
>> Isn't the whole idea in this thread "let's make gschem/pcb more accessible”?
>>
> Yes, but the answer looks *completely* different depending on whether you’re coming from a pcb (integrated tool) or geda-gaf (toolkit) perspective.
>
>
> John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
> http://www.noqsi.com/
> jpd AT noqsi DOT com
>
>
>
>
>
Hello John,
Please enlighten me for I fail to see what makes pcb an integrated tool
and gschem not.
True gschem is part of series of tools bundled under geda-gaf, in the
unix way they probably would have been in seperate
repositories/.tar.gz/.rpm/.deb/whatnot.
In my limited view, gschem converts user input into a .sch file versus
pcb converts user input into a .pcb file.
gattrib/gschlas/gsymcheck are designed for managing attributes for a
.sch file vs. plugins (like "teardrop") are designed for managing
entities for a .pcb file.
Then there is a bunch of exporters added in pcb to "export" the .pcb
file into the format of need vs. gnetlist with a bunch of backends to
"export" the .sch file into the format of need.
I think gschem and pcb are very alike.
If we would improve on pcb like as was done in gschem, we would probably
end up with a "libpcb" (good) and invoking plugins (written in scheme)
with guile-2.0.0 and all sorts of portability and/or build dependency
issues (bad).
IMHO, the gnetlist scheme backends is the best way to
alienate/discourage "common" users (EE) without a master degree on CS
(did you develop the secret "gnetlist+scheme-freemason-handshake" to
show your membership of this highly elite old-boys-club) from
contributing to backends/plugins, thanks pcb got rid of m4 footprints
... well, almost.
IMHO, gnetlist backends should be written in a language of the EE's
choice, and pcb plugins should be too (pcb-rnd is ahead on that one,
congrats Igor2 ;-).
Add transparency and accessibility to all stuff in a gschem data-structure.
Well, maybe it's time to convert the gschem symbol file format into m4,
or scheme or ... nah, won't do.
Just my thoughts.
Kind regards,
Bert Timmerman.
- Raw text -