Re: gEDA-user: Yet another netlister

["A.Burinskiy" <alexbour@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 08/10/2009 06:03 AM, John Doty wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2009, at 9:59 PM, A.Burinskiy wrote:
>
>    
>> John,
>>
>> Do you mean that one day source= attribute is reference to schematic,
>> another day it is something else?
>>      
>
> No, I mean that many back ends need to see a flat netlist, while in
> the future others will need to see the hierarchy. The ones that need
> to see the hierarchy will need to see the source= attributes. All of
> them.
>
>    
If I'm correct source= has the same meaning regardless flat or 
hierarchical netlist.
>> We have to stick to some reasonable
>> meaning of all attributes, at list to be able to exchange libraries
>> and
>> collect our work over the years, isn't it?
>>      
>
> Yes. That's one reason I recommended you master the documentation for
> spice-sdb before writing another SPICE netlister.
>    
I think I'm getting closer to what you mean, but not yet there. I think 
about expanding routin for some back end, but still thinking what lang. 
I should use for that. May be simpliest would be something like
printf %refdes %net %attr ? Rather then full blown language? Guile too 
complex for this simple task. Any way the most critical for me now is 
waveform viewer. I found that existing few do not fit the purpose, and 
I'm dealing with that. If you convince me I will do two tasks in || - 
and will write backend.
>    
>> Talking about ynetlist: it has exactly front, inner, and backend. I
>> call
>> it component/net collection, symbol elaboration, output netlist. By
>> modifying only output I may create any netlist. But yet I do not see a
>> reason why user should mangle with programming.... It is programmer
>> responsibility to cover all needs.
>>      
>
> I absolutely and emphatically disagree. Users cannot count on
> programmers to solve the right problems. Programmers are masters of
> technique, but the most important knowledge needed to make a
> successful program is understanding of the *application*. Users need
> to take that responsibility.
>
> It's similar to writing a scientific paper: a scientist must be the
> main author. A technical writer is very useful in the process, but
> not central. Programming is an essential enabling skill, similar to
> technical writing. Everybody should have a reasonable level of
> competence here. Specialist programmers are there to help produce the
> highest quality product, not to choose how to address the problem to
>    

In commercial world it is absolutely true, and I 100% agree with you. 
But we are in Open source domain. Main difference? Right! In Open Source 
World the programs are written by end users!
> be solved.
>
> John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
> http://www.noqsi.com/
> jpd@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>
>    

Alex.


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user