Re: gEDA-user: How to deal with single/dual parts?

[John Doty <jpd@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 18, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Peter Clifton wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 17:19 -0700, John Doty wrote:
>
>> Another problem is that it doesn't play well with hierarchy. Suppose
>> you need a bunch of the same circuit, but one of the building blocks
>> comes in pairs, and another comes in duals. That forces you to draw
>> six of the circuit per block. And then maybe you need nine of them.
>> At that point, hierarchy isn't worth it. But nine identical (from a
>> signal flow point of view) circuits *should* be the kind of thing you
>> do with hierarchy.
>
> That is of course, a distinction between the logical hierarchy, and  
> the
> physical hierarchy. I'm not 100% convinced either way.
>
> I would find it very surprising to see a product schematic  
> containing a
> hierarchy block, to find that when embodied, that hierarchy is  
> violated.
>
> You would probably want separate _physical_ schematic produced, with
> some / all of the hierarchy flattened out, _as implemented_.


So I think what you're saying is that you like the idea of a tool  
that converts (hierarchical .sch)->(flat .sch).

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd@xxxxxxxxx




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