Re: gEDA-user: Using .global statements in GNUcap and mult

[al davis <ad151@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tuesday 10 March 2009, r wrote:
> I don't think performance is a selling point of Gnucap.

It depends who you ask.

> Most 
> potential users simply want a functional, feature-rich,
> open-source circuit simulator. 

That's the idea of the plugin system, and where most recent work 
is being done.  Plugins are supposed to move a lot of that into 
the user space, so others can contribute easier, and so 
work-in-progress can be made available without compromising the 
integrity of the core.

> I particularly like the 
> modular design of Gnucap and its planned features (new
> models, verilog-a, parametrized components). OTOH, what I am
> missing is some stability and robustness. Think things like
> not crashing, 

Can you send me some examples of where it crashes?

> ability to probe signals at lower levels of 
> hierarchy,

You can.

> working post-processing/measurements, 

It has a post-processing "measure" command, that sets 
parameters.  Those parameters can be used in expressions, 
including automatically changing values for the next run.

> robust  
> operating point analysis etc.

Can you send me some examples of where it doesn't work?

> As for the simulation performance, there are many things to
> improve as well. Gnucap still doesn't support gear
> integration method,

yes it does.

> its transient simulation time step 
> control is very brittle

Really?  can you give some examples?  I don't have access to the 
big-bucks simulators for comparison, but in my tests the time 
step control is consistently better than Spice.

> and output data are saved in 
> non-indexed text files.

Eventually, the output will be through plugins too, so you will 
be able to add other formats.  For now, I had to put a stop to 
new features to focus on making an official release.


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