Re: gEDA-user: Multiple pages

[al davis <ad252@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wednesday 18 August 2010, John Doty wrote:
> Exactly what is the problem you experience?

1. There are many components that do not netlist properly.  
Every symbol must netlist correctly, no exceptions.  There is 
more to simulation than simple spice circuits.

2. There are others that netlist properly to spice only  because 
of hacks specific to the symbol.  It is not acceptable for the 
netlister to have any knowledge of any specific symbol or any 
specific parameter, ever.

3. There is no reverse translation.

4. In most cases, the user enters a value string, in whatever 
syntax the simulator wants, which means it could be different 
for different simulators.

5. It seems to be necessary to have a different schematic for 
layout and simulation.

6. Probes are not supported.

7. Nets are collapsed out, even if the simulator doesn't want it 
that way.

8. I'm tired of hearing about how perfect it is, when I know it 
isn't.

9. We need to support modern simulators, not just 30 year old 
antiques like Spice, and we need to support them fully, not just 
the compatibility subset.

10. geda seems to insist that everyone who wants to play here 
must adopt its way of doing things, which is in many ways like a 
proprietary system.  We don't outreach to formats that the 
leaders consider to be standard.

11. That "two stage amplifier" example should be simple enough 
to explain in a single breath, but it's ..  how long????????

I could probably come up with another dozen, but this should be 
enough.








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