Re: gEDA-user: uEDA .. was .. Re: Heavy Symbols and such

[al davis <ad151@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday 06 December 2007, Steve Meier wrote:
> I think the only area of question is... is there a need to
> translate from spice to another language? The need for a
> spice output is so that tools that use spice input
> exclusively can be supported and that users who preffer to
> have a version of their work in a spice syntax can have it. I
> see no need to deprive geda users of a spice output? If you
> don't need it don't use it.

You are asking the wrong question.

All analog simulators accept some form of the Spice language, so 
if that is what you have, you probably don't need to translate 
it.

If you have one of the extended forms of the Spice language, you 
may need to translate it to use it.

The more relevant question is whether the Spice language can 
represent everything we need.  The answer to that is no.

Another relevant question is whether the translator we have 
fully supports the Spice language of the simulators we use.  
The answer to that again is no.

A third relavant question is whether the translator correctly 
translates all symbols.  Again, no.

Nobody is asking to deprive geda users of a spice output.  That 
would be foolish.


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