al davis wrote: > For software to be truly expert friendly, it must use languages > that are meaningful in the application domain, and lots of > extendability. To a circuit designer, that is not C, Scheme, > M4, or XML.
[jg]What is it? Gareth Edwards wrote: > As for the original topic/question, I'm astounded that Tcl hasn't had > more of a mention. In my day job, most EDA tools I use day-to-day are > built around/have embedded a Tcl interpreter. Scheme is not on the > radar. [jg]Of course. That's part of chip design since 1991 or before even. Thanks, that was what wanted -- all the candidates. Tcl too. Eric Brombaugh wrote: referring to > HW/SW co-development for situations like SoCs which have embedded > processors, then yes - the folks on the SW side will usually be > developing in Assy/C/C++ and using simulators/emulators to test code > prior to getting silicon. [jg]OK. Nothing there that's helpful for gEDA tool scripting. [jg]Tcl is it then, along with perl and python. Those are the languages we would get the most out of as gschem or pcb scripting interfaces. Any more? John -- Ecosensory Austin TX _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user