www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: geda-user/2013/08/05/13:45:30

X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-TCPREMOTEIP: 67.253.185.10
X-Authenticated-UID: jpd AT noqsi DOT com
From: John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Gschem actions
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:44:49 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CACPio-6n3+9SPJGzMXKPPLGSwgK=tvRZ1kfXB-LqWV30Z3P2oA@mail.gmail.com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <CACPio-6n3+9SPJGzMXKPPLGSwgK=tvRZ1kfXB-LqWV30Z3P2oA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Message-Id: <EDF3344C-13E0-4355-9589-8EBD79C64524@noqsi.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
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

--Apple-Mail-195-133014565
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii


On Aug 5, 2013, at 8:50 AM, Nathan Stewart wrote:

> After some mulling about, I think I came up with a handy way to keep =
my hierarchical schems together with their simulation schematics. Make =
the circuit for a simulation a sub-circuit, and make THAT component =
graphical. That should keep it out of the netlister for the actual =
board, without breaking the netlister when run on the sim circuit.

It won't show up in the sim circuit if it's graphical. This is a good =
thing from my point of view: I frequently have graphical "comments" in =
circuits.

=46rom my point of view, it makes better sense that the simulation =
schematic is always on the highest level of interest, not in a =
subcircuit. It makes more sense to simulate the lowest level circuits =
first, then build more complex circuits with them, simulate those, etc. =
until you've put together the biggest thing you'll simulate.

>=20
> I've also stopped using pins on subcircuit components unless I want to =
clearly illustrate something.

Huh? Pins go on symbols. Do you mean IO symbols, perhaps? Are you really =
using hierarchy, or do you just have several top-level schematics?


> In my project, for instance, I have the following boards. 1) PS =
Controller / Monitoring, 2) front panel (actually two boards because =
it's longer than 200mm), 3) preamp, and 4) power amp.=20

That sounds like four top level schematics.

>=20
> I use pins on the components that represent connections between =
controller, preamp, and power amp. I don't for just about everything =
else. This lets me 1) avoid creating new symbols for everything, and 2) =
declutters. My basic rule is anything you would explicitly draw a line =
for in a single page schematic gets a pin. If you would use a label, it =
doesn't need a pin.=20
>=20
> So now that I have my simulation circuits handy, lurking under =
graphical symbols - I want to add an action to run it. Before I go =
reinventing wheels - does this capability already exist? I see spice =
blocks for includes, models, but I want a spice file block that will run =
the netlister on the current page, run ngspice then run a spice batch =
file on that.=20

Doesn't exist. It might be possible to write a scheme script for gschem =
that would do this. I would suggest that rather than using a symbol, you =
drive this with a top level attribute instead. Gnetlist back ends ignore =
unfamiliar top level attributes, but unfamiliar symbols confuse them.

>=20
> So:
> 1) Does this capability exist already?=20
> 2) Does it offend anyone's [who has commit access] sensibility? =20

I am strongly of the opinion that facilities like this, specialized to a =
particular flow, do not belong in gschem out of the box. On the other =
hand, the capability to write such a thing should be present in the =
Guile scripting layer, so you could write a few lines a Guile, and then =
anybody could put (load ns-ngspice-personality) in a gschemrc file and =
do it your way. If it can't be done, that's where to fix it.

> 3) Security - I'm not used to thinking in terms of paranoia, but it =
occurs to me that:
>=20
> * anytime you give people the ability to execute something from =
something that people think of in terms of 'data', you introduce =
security issues.
>=20
> * I suspect something like 99.99% of gschem projects are viewed only =
by their creator - so it might not matter.
>=20
> * The security can might be kicked down the road to ngspice by =
allowing only execution of the netlister, and running spice commands on =
the netlist. Thus - no NEW security risks are introduced.=20
>=20
> 4) In the interest of that last bullet - does anyone use spice other =
than ngspice with gschem?=20

Yes. LTspice, gnucap, and Tanner SPICE at least. I also export netlists =
in SPICE format to Cadence for ASIC layout. Most probably others. Also, =
I run several different versions of ngspice (one of them locally =
customized) with different names depending on the simulation.

>=20
> RFC
>=20
>=20

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com



--Apple-Mail-195-133014565
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=us-ascii

<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><br><div><div>On Aug 5, 2013, at 8:50 AM, Nathan Stewart =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>After =
some mulling about, I think I came up with a handy way to keep my =
hierarchical schems together with their simulation schematics. Make the =
circuit for a simulation a sub-circuit, and make THAT component =
graphical. That should keep it out of the netlister for the actual =
board, without breaking the netlister when run on the sim =
circuit.<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><=
div><br></div>It won't show up in the sim circuit if it's graphical. =
This is a good thing from my point of view: I frequently have graphical =
"comments" in circuits.</div><div><br></div><div>=46rom my point of =
view, it makes better sense that the simulation schematic is always on =
the highest level of interest, not in a subcircuit. It makes more sense =
to simulate the lowest level circuits first, then build more complex =
circuits with them, simulate those, etc. until you've put together the =
biggest thing you'll simulate.</div><div><br><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>
<br></div>I've also stopped using pins on subcircuit components unless I =
want to clearly illustrate =
something.</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br>=
</div>Huh? Pins go on symbols. Do you mean IO symbols, perhaps? Are you =
really using hierarchy, or do you just have several top-level =
schematics?</div><div><br></div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div> In my project, for instance, =
I have the following boards. 1) PS Controller / Monitoring, 2) front =
panel (actually two boards because it's longer than 200mm), 3) preamp, =
and 4) power amp. =
<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>=
That sounds like four top level schematics.</div><div><br><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div>
<br></div>I use pins on the components that represent connections =
between controller, preamp, and power amp. I don't for just about =
everything else. This lets me 1) avoid creating new symbols for =
everything, and 2) declutters. My basic rule is anything you would =
explicitly draw a line for in a single page schematic gets a pin. If you =
would use a label, it doesn't need a pin. <br>
<br></div>So now that I have my simulation circuits handy, lurking under =
graphical symbols - I want to add an action to run it. Before I go =
reinventing wheels - does this capability already exist? I see spice =
blocks for includes, models, but I want a spice file block that will run =
the netlister on the current page, run ngspice then run a spice batch =
file on that. =
<br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Doesn't=
 exist. It might be possible to write a scheme script for gschem that =
would do this. I would suggest that rather than using a symbol, you =
drive this with a top level attribute instead. Gnetlist back ends ignore =
unfamiliar top level attributes, but unfamiliar symbols confuse =
them.</div><div><br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div>
<br>So:<br></div>1) Does this capability exist already? <br>2) Does it =
offend anyone's [who has commit access] sensibility?&nbsp; =
<br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>I am strongly of =
the opinion that facilities like this, specialized to a particular flow, =
do not belong in gschem out of the box. On the other hand, the =
capability to write such a thing should be present in the Guile =
scripting layer, so you could write a few lines a Guile, and then =
anybody could put (load ns-ngspice-personality) in a gschemrc file and =
do it your way. If it can't be done, that's where to fix =
it.</div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>3) Security - I'm not used to thinking in =
terms of paranoia, but it occurs to me that:<br>
<br>* anytime you give people the ability to execute something from =
something that people think of in terms of 'data', you introduce =
security issues.<br><br></div>* I suspect something like 99.99% of =
gschem projects are viewed only by their creator - so it might not =
matter.<br>
<br></div>* The security can might be kicked down the road to ngspice by =
allowing only execution of the netlister, and running spice commands on =
the netlist. Thus - no NEW security risks are introduced. =
<br><br></div><div>
4) In the interest of that last bullet - does anyone use spice other =
than ngspice with gschem? =
<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Yes. LTspice, gnucap, and =
Tanner SPICE at least. I also export netlists in SPICE format to Cadence =
for ASIC layout. Most probably others. Also, I run several different =
versions of ngspice (one of them locally customized) with different =
names depending on the simulation.</div><div><br><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div><div>RFC<br></div><div><br><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><div>
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; =
border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; =
font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; =
-khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; =
-apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; =
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; =
border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; =
font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; =
-khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; =
-apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; =
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><p style=3D"margin: =
0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" =
style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">John Doty<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span><span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-tab">&nbsp; &nbsp;<span =
class=3D"Apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span></span></span>Noqsi =
Aerospace, Ltd.</font></p><p style=3D"margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px =
0.0px"><a href=3D"http://www.noqsi.com/">http://www.noqsi.com/</a></p><p =
style=3D"margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face=3D"Helvetica" =
size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica"><a =
href=3D"mailto:jpd AT noqsi DOT com">jpd AT noqsi DOT com</a></font></p><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"></span></span>
</div>
<br></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail-195-133014565--

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019