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

[Peter TB Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:21:10 -0700, John Doty <jpd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> I hold that a "slot" is related to a multiplicity of identical units
>> within the chip, and the slotting mechanism was _not_ intended as an
>> arbitrary way of fudging different combinations of pin-numbers into  
>> the
>> netlist in various situations.
> 
> Intent doesn't matter here. A clean design performs a simple, clean  
> function. Intent is provided by the user.

Fine. Then you will agree with me that the current slotting mechanism *does
not* work as designed.  This is a fact, unless you equate "as designed"
with "as currently implemented."

And, furthermore, if I/we fixed it to work as designed, some users would be
up in arms -- because they have been using the mechanism in a way contrary
to its design, and fixing it to work as designed has broken their
schematics.

Which is what Peter C. was saying, and which point you have ignored.

Note that this same point applies to several other aspects of gEDA.  If,
when users state that they are taking advantage of bugs, we do not point
out that they *are* bugs and encourage them not to, then we lose the
ability to fix those bugs.  Down that path lies Windows^Wmadness.

Peter

-- 
Peter Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Remote Sensing Research Group
Surrey Space Centre


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