gEDA-user: Ideas for fixing slotting, methodology discussion, NOT implementation details!

[Steven Michalske <smichalske@xxxxxxxxx>]

Slotting is broke,  the thread that prompted this this mail proves that.

no change we make here is going to work with how our users use slots

The answer to this is simple.
1. Deprecate slots, leave its functionality as is.
2. Implement the method that we come up with, without regard to slots.
3. Users get something that works in both cases.
	- Old way still work
	- New ways work "Better" or at least consistent



So on to the new way.

This thread is NOT for dicusson of we need to fix the backend frontend  
use SCHEME blah blah blah
This thread is for what we need the new slotting to do well

What do we need to define?
I will logically split a symbol and a component now, but we shouldn't  
make the assumption that the will be split in the final implementation.

In a symbol:
Specify what part of a slot(s) this symbol represents/requires.
Specify what parts of a particular slot can be interchanged, e.g. pin  
swapping
Specify what power domains are required for the part.
	- e.g. level shifters and pins to power domains
	- e.g. in a 3.3V and 5V system, which voltage is this symbol on
Specify what clock domain a symbol is in
	- e.g.  you can't move some parts across clock domains in VLSI





In a component
Specify what slots this component provides.
Specify a base part number
	- this maps to many manufacture part numbers
		- manufacture part numbers map to pins/ports to pin numbers



Decided to drop the message into the wild.  input please folks

Steve


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