Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/03/01/15:43:25
Lev wrote:
> Please everybody write down a wish list of PCB and gschem. We shell
> select what is the most important issue and start making it right.
Oh, I got lots of wishes! Needed some time to formulate and
prioritize. I confined myself to a list of ten (plus a zeroth one):
* My number one wish would be to regain the ability to do a windows
version of the geda tools. It used to be possible to cross compile the
whole suite. A PhD student at my day job even prepared an installer,
so the geda suite could be installed like any other major piece of
software. Unfortunately, his tool chain broke when geda started to
require guile >2.0 . Since guile 2.0 and onwards the cross compile
suites fail to produce a working windows version of guile. IMHO, this
is a major regression. It puts geda behind its main contenders kicad
and eagle.
Irritatingly, the guile developers do not seem to seems to care. I got
zero response on their mailing list :-|
* My number two wish would be scripting, both in pcb and in gschem.
That is, a way to do everything the GUI does but in a script. geda-gaf
and pcb both have implemented some aspects but not enough to actually
make it useful in the sense my wish calls for. See how freeCAD uses
python or the way eagle uses "ulp" scripts.
In pcb the concept of "actions" goes a long way. But there is no glue
to use them conditionally or iterate in loops. Everything that
involves explicit mouse input is missing from the set of actions.
In geda-gaf the situation is somewhat complimentary. There is
algorithmic glue in the form of the ability to interpret guile
scripts. But unless I missed something actions are missing and there
is no way to make the script put a symbol somewhere.
* My number three wish would be blind and buried vias for pcb.
Blind and buried vias are vital when it comes to highly integrated
digital components. Most significantly, it blocks me from using FPGAs
except for the smallest versions.
Blind and buried vias is a larger request than it looks. It requires a
change of pcb format. When done right, it involves a redesign of the
way layers are represented internally.
* My number four wish would be EDIF import/export both for pcb and for
gschem. This would open doors to all kinds of work-flows, including
interaction with other EDA suites.
* My number six wish would be better integration of simulation in the
GUI. Running a simulation of a simple circuit should be as straight
forward as making a PCB of the circuit. This requires proper handles
in the GUI and a decent set of models in the default library. See qucs
or LTspice for examples how set-up of a simulation can be done in a
user friendly way.
* My number seven wish would be the notion of packages. A package
would be a container for all information that are associated with a
component: Symbols, footprints, values, variants, SPICE models, 3D
models, where to buy, notes... Note, the plural. A component might be
represented by more than one symbol. There may be different footprints
(DIP8, SO8, SOT23-5, ..), or different values (10nF, 12nF, 15nF, ..).
Symbols, footprints and models can be directly contained in the
package or they can be referenced by a their name. Both approaches
have their pros and cons. It is up to the maintainer of a library to
draw the line and decide what exactly is included in a package of her
library.
Packages would be referenced in schematics much like symbols are now.
Unlike now, the package "knows" about alternative footprints and
values. So the GUI can present list to the user to choose from.
Packages would also be referenced in the layout. This helps to keep
layout and schematic consistent. It would facilitate back-annotation.
Packages would be the atoms of a geda library.
The notion of packages is quite common in EDAs (see eagle, or protel).
IMHO, quite a bit of the awkwardness with geda libraries originates
from its absence. Packages would allow for a scalable and easily
sharable libraries.
* My number eight wish would be the concept of groups both in gschem
and in pcb.
* My number nine wish would be shove and push of lines in pcb. I used
this intensively in protel99. It made manual routing of dense layouts
so much less tedious.
* My number ten wish would be a GUI that gravitates a little more
toward the concepts that have emerged and proven useful in the rest of
GUI driven applications. From the top of my head:
tabs to deal with several open documents.
configurable toolboxes
in-place-editing of strings
visible handles at sensitive places of a focused object
a work-area for user input rather than a multitude of pop-ups
some kind of feedback on the object a mouse click would refer to
And then there is zeroth wish for better documentation. The current
state can be characterized as a "historically grown pile" in various
formats and various states of up-to-dateness -- This is neither
attractive to the new users nor always useful to the experienced.
---<)kaimartin(>---
- Raw text -