Re: gEDA-user: Heavy Symbols and such

[Martin Maney <maney@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 08:07:45AM +0100, Bert Timmerman wrote:
> I think we should not create heavy symbols on build time but during run
> time (when the part is needed).

+1

What's the difference between a light symbol and a heavy one?  It's
just that the heavy symbol has more attributes that specify it for a
particular component in various ways, no?  And so it's really just
about what you begin with when you add a new symbol to the schematic,
unless you expect that a heavy were resistant to being edited (those
heavy attributes nailed down as it were) or... other things?

> Levente Kovacs has set up a database concept which could be expanded on
> (the bookmarked link I have does not seem to work anymore).
> 
> In this way we could have both: generic "light" symbols and single
> purpose "heavy" symbols.

My thinking so far - and it's certainly not complete! - has been that
with a bit of care light and heavy symbols should play nicely together. 
It may not be this simple when all's done - the discussion about FPGAs
suggests there may be inherent complications I'm not thinking of yet. 
It's certainly not so simple to the extent that the schematic editor
needs to do stuff (beyond editing and maybe displaying) with the
attributes...

> See also:
> 
> http://www.seul.org/pipermail/geda-dev/2007-September/003665.html

Might be copies of the files at http://web.interware.hu/lekovacs/ - try
poking in the "Public files" section.  I'm not sure what's going on
there - clicking on things seems to cause unexpected changes, and some
intriguing filenames vanished and I couldn't get them back again...

-- 
You arguably have quite a few inalienable rights,
but being taken seriously isn't one of them.
Neither is being respected.  -- Rick Moen  <linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/>



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