Re: gEDA-user: Toporouter Changes

[Anthony Blake <tonyb33@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ethan Swint wrote:
>>>> I would prefer to implement this sort of functionality with topological
>>>> directives or constraints, and avoid geometric constraints if possible.
>>>>    
>> Yes, you've just described geometric constraints in great detail. :P As I
>> understand it, topological constraints are something completely different!
>>
>>    
> A little late to the discussion, but here's my $0.02: topological router 
> is the only practical way of finding prospective routes between two 
> points, but the geometric constraints are what really matter (provided a 
> path is found!) to the performance of the circuit.
> So once a topological solution is provided, optimizing artificial 
> potential or cost functions based on geometric and electromagnetic 
> criteria would be the best way to route within a Voronoi cell, possibly 
> with an edge from the corresponding Delaunay diagram as a starting 
> candidate.  (It looks like this may be the way it's done already?) If 
> multiple paths are found, the 'best' path would be chosen by evaluating 
> the cost functions.

Hmm.. for example, if there is some EMC consideration which might lead a 
human to make a geometric constraint, wouldn't it be possible to define 
those EMC constraints so that the toporouter can make the same decisions 
the human did, with the aid of in-layout simulation? And cut out the 
middle man, so to speak.

Cheers,
Anthony





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