X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <55DCAA14.1030009@xs4all.nl>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:47:00 +0200
From: "Bert Timmerman (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110429 Fedora/2.0.14-1.fc13 SeaMonkey/2.0.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Re: off-topic: daydreaming about modularization
References: <CAM2RGhTJ-gywb3LrkKoNKUxkwJCTsJ7vRxiLtmrXa5Mnp0331w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <DUB125-W46D6798DBF674B80F24208C6620 AT phx DOT gbl> <6B8DDCCF-0E84-43DC-94A3-89CE0E56F0ED AT noqsi DOT com> <201508242052 DOT 28189 DOT ad252 AT freeelectron DOT net> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508250534570 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <3766120C-93DD-454D-B2FA-7C79B78DC86C AT noqsi DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508251403030 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <8DC5050C-49D2-49AD-94B0-A1FC857178E5 AT noqsi DOT com> <55DC6491 DOT 8030607 AT iae DOT nl> <3FA132D6-A8D9-47C8-8D37-E1962EF4098B AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <3FA132D6-A8D9-47C8-8D37-E1962EF4098B@noqsi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

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.