On Tuesday 10 March 2009, r wrote: > I don't think performance is a selling point of Gnucap.
It depends who you ask. > Most > potential users simply want a functional, feature-rich, > open-source circuit simulator. That's the idea of the plugin system, and where most recent work is being done. Plugins are supposed to move a lot of that into the user space, so others can contribute easier, and so work-in-progress can be made available without compromising the integrity of the core. > I particularly like the > modular design of Gnucap and its planned features (new > models, verilog-a, parametrized components). OTOH, what I am > missing is some stability and robustness. Think things like > not crashing, Can you send me some examples of where it crashes? > ability to probe signals at lower levels of > hierarchy, You can. > working post-processing/measurements, It has a post-processing "measure" command, that sets parameters. Those parameters can be used in expressions, including automatically changing values for the next run. > robust > operating point analysis etc. Can you send me some examples of where it doesn't work? > As for the simulation performance, there are many things to > improve as well. Gnucap still doesn't support gear > integration method, yes it does. > its transient simulation time step > control is very brittle Really? can you give some examples? I don't have access to the big-bucks simulators for comparison, but in my tests the time step control is consistently better than Spice. > and output data are saved in > non-indexed text files. Eventually, the output will be through plugins too, so you will be able to add other formats. For now, I had to put a stop to new features to focus on making an official release. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user