Re: gEDA-user: gschem hangs on a symbol

[John Coppens <john@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 14 May 2006 14:04:28 +0200
Werner Hoch <werner.ho@xxxxxx> wrote:

> On Saturday 13 May 2006 18:08, John Coppens wrote:
> > Well, maybe this could be a suggestion for the gschem writers. I
> > can't see why recursive calls could be useful, as there is no
> > conditional construction to avoid problems..
> 
> Recursion makes short and powerful programs.

Yes... But the symbol definition language doesn't have conditional
constructs, does it? So how can one get out of a recursion?
 
> > In general - it doesn't even make sense to _include_ symbols inside
> > others, does it? I mean, nobody garantees that the included symbol
> > won't change later on.
> 
> In future there may be (will be) support for symbol inheritance.
> http://archives.seul.org/geda/dev/Oct-2005/msg00043.html

Inheritance seems way more logical. Symbols are passive objects... Or
maybe we could even make them active (methods), so we need only one DIP
component, one SIP...

John