On 08/10/2009 06:03 AM, John Doty wrote: > On Aug 9, 2009, at 9:59 PM, A.Burinskiy wrote: > > >> John, >> >> Do you mean that one day source= attribute is reference to schematic, >> another day it is something else? >> > > No, I mean that many back ends need to see a flat netlist, while in > the future others will need to see the hierarchy. The ones that need > to see the hierarchy will need to see the source= attributes. All of > them. > > If I'm correct source= has the same meaning regardless flat or hierarchical netlist. >> We have to stick to some reasonable >> meaning of all attributes, at list to be able to exchange libraries >> and >> collect our work over the years, isn't it? >> > > Yes. That's one reason I recommended you master the documentation for > spice-sdb before writing another SPICE netlister. > I think I'm getting closer to what you mean, but not yet there. I think about expanding routin for some back end, but still thinking what lang. I should use for that. May be simpliest would be something like printf %refdes %net %attr ? Rather then full blown language? Guile too complex for this simple task. Any way the most critical for me now is waveform viewer. I found that existing few do not fit the purpose, and I'm dealing with that. If you convince me I will do two tasks in || - and will write backend. > >> Talking about ynetlist: it has exactly front, inner, and backend. I >> call >> it component/net collection, symbol elaboration, output netlist. By >> modifying only output I may create any netlist. But yet I do not see a >> reason why user should mangle with programming.... It is programmer >> responsibility to cover all needs. >> > > I absolutely and emphatically disagree. Users cannot count on > programmers to solve the right problems. Programmers are masters of > technique, but the most important knowledge needed to make a > successful program is understanding of the *application*. Users need > to take that responsibility. > > It's similar to writing a scientific paper: a scientist must be the > main author. A technical writer is very useful in the process, but > not central. Programming is an essential enabling skill, similar to > technical writing. Everybody should have a reasonable level of > competence here. Specialist programmers are there to help produce the > highest quality product, not to choose how to address the problem to >
In commercial world it is absolutely true, and I 100% agree with you. But we are in Open source domain. Main difference? Right! In Open Source World the programs are written by end users! > be solved. > > John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. > http://www.noqsi.com/ > j...@noqsi.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > geda-user mailing list > geda-user@moria.seul.org > http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user > > Alex. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user