X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=DVT+OwZEytPdxm25JK20jFPgfnyWQrYkanOeSqntfKs=; b=CddFEgDCgQwKMK4fv+Gu9mrFG5RSvJy+jrSiwZUU1eCpFMsa5I16fkPmn3Vo7/nzh2 irra6eMIKuNe3KbaVbbDhuoyIkUC7eassMHqIaQjgs8X0epOTHCbt7wda7WXrF62VMp5 D78L+y6+gYEuAt7qEPlRVhH9TohStw4Mh8cR1i3G/ugESugIMd+/Z5uRjqNBm/JmqcXs pTZAbv37+TFptV9nn5ozoncYrGs2x9Sd0VMSHvkdB3cMRjhsmb0xXyHk1uqpVHlZ5C/H afvjyyVnYoVid8BpygnkklrCBsU6VMfXB6hkCgKU+JLkfrTHnNAD38FQBpy4f9M81QRa OCkA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.20.5 with SMTP id j5mr445297lae.84.1440603706405; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:41:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55DDCF2E.6070505@ecosensory.com> References: <20150824223846 DOT 0ba61ba7 AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org> <55DBA2B7 DOT 1080501 AT ecosensory DOT com> <55DC31E0 DOT 9050606 AT jump-ing DOT de> <20150825215611 DOT 1794b153c4160dddb739b6d3 AT gmail DOT com> <55DDCF2E DOT 6070505 AT ecosensory DOT com> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 11:41:46 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] netlisting libraries (was: memory planning and pcb file format) From: "Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 Precedence: bulk On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:37 AM, John Griessen wrote: > On 08/25/2015 02:56 PM, Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via > geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >> >> It might work better you postpone the memory representation and figure >> which kind of functions you need to access the objects. Then the access >> functions are decided it will be easier to think about the representation. > > +1 > > On 08/25/2015 04:05 PM, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via > geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:02 PM, DJ > Delorie wrote: >>> > >>> >I wonder if gschem would be more plugin-friendly if there were more >>> >operations that acted directly on the schematic you're editing. PCB >>> >has a lot of features/plugins that are "editors" of the pcb, but other >>> >than gattrib most of the other gEDA tools work with a pre-existing >>> >schematic. >> Funny I always thought of that as the reason why PCB it lacks a >> coherent concept of a layout. > > no, it's just the evolved spaghetti of internal code. > > The concept of "be an editor" with the "schematic file as your database" is > a simplifying one. > Same for layout. If gnetlist was an external library that could talk both > ways it would be improved also. > > Think of the non-standard use case of creating a FPGA schematic that > replaces a discrete logic chunk > with a module that is only in verilog: > Save the discrete logic to a new sch file, create a symbol for the verilog > chunk, > connect up after deleting the discrete logic, generate a new netlist. > Generate a new netlist for the > discrete part. > > Now you want to check things. This is all new code for future. > 1. generate a simulatable verilog-ams netlist from the verilog chunk. > 2. create a simulation version schematic and generate simulatable > verilog-ams netlist from the top interconnect. > 3. concatenate and simulate together > 4. create a simulation version schematic and generate simulatable > verilog-ams netlist from the discrete logic. > concatenate discrete logic verilog-ams netlist and verilog-ams netlist from > the top interconnect. > 5. They should be equal. What excites you is not what excites me. > I would not mind if all comparisons of back-annotated, simulation, carrying > forward to layout > were handled in a separate GUI, and set of commands put in a library so the > several cases that always > dominate peoples' thinking so they have a tough time planning code are > separate and not such a problem. > > The translations from schem to netlist seem easy for programs to deal with > as things scale up, > but the internal design rule checks need speed help, and separating might > allow thinking of speedy ways > more easily. I'm thinking towards printable electronics plus occasional > FPGAs, which is down the road a bit, > but possible for gEDA, probably never for IDE type FOSS ECAD tools we know. -- Home http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/ Work http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/