Re: gEDA-user: Functional blocks and PCB format changes

[DJ Delorie <dj@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> If we tagged individual objects with rules it would be difficult to edit
> rules in a systemetic way. So I don't think that's a good way to go.

No, we tag objects with rule *names*.  Hopefully rules can nest, so
you can have meta-rules like "signal-line-rule" or "12vac rule".
Without a tag, you'd get synthetic tags like "line-rule" or
"pin-rule".

> Speed might be a problem, but again, Lisp would be a huge boon to this,
> if only because of the immense amount of AI-related stuff out there.

gschem uses a lot of lisp (in the guise of Guile).  No thanks.
Despite PCBs being object oriented, they're not *data* oriented like
Lisp is.

> C++ would be a definite improvement. However, it's a scary-huge language

No, it's not.  It has much more *capability* than C but you don't
*have* to use it all.


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