On Sunday 28 September 2008, Rick Collins wrote: > Personally, I have never found the use of back-annotation to > be very user friendly. I prefer to open both tools at once > and make the same changes in both tools at the same time. > When I see I want to swap pins in the layout, I do that in > the layout tool and also in the schematic tool. At some > point I re-import the netlist and verify that the two tools > still agree on connectivity.
You are mixing the user interface with the underlying implementation. You can have both. With tools being developed independently, back-annotation may be the best way to achieve the interface goal you want. Remember .. it's not just schematic and layout. The only reason geda doesn't have post-layout signal integrity simulation is the lack of a translator. > Personally, I favor the idea of a unified data base for both > layout and schematic. So far no one seems to agree with this > idea. That is false. No one has stepped up to do the work, and most people here don't understand it. How about you? _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user