On Jan 2, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Patrick Bernaud wrote:

> John Doty writes:
>> [...]
>> The work-around for the drc2 incompatibility. Where is it?
> 
> You remember that I am not the person proposing the initial patch,
> only one reviewer?

You did more than review: you thoroughly rewrote it in a way that makes it more 
difficult to read, repair, reuse, and override if needed. You dismissed 
factoring that helped put the back end writer in control as "crippling the 
API". It seemed to me you wanted ownership of that code. You can have it if you 
want it. If not, I'll try to find time to finish it.

The political difficulty of improving the factoring in this small area has me 
discouraged about any serious improvement in the flexibility of gnetlist. The 
existing back ends will constrain it to remain an unusually powerful and 
flexible tool within its box, but the box will never expand very much.

In the meantime, at Noqsi Aerospace, we've been developing "lambda-geda" which 
is potentially a much more flexible schematic processor. Right now we use it 
for schematic to schematic transformations, but netlisting is certainly a 
potential application area.  So that's where my focus will inevitably move in 
the future. 

> 
> Beside with the example I proposed, it is not an "incompatibility",
> but merely a (valid) warning triggered by the new code. 
> 
> Of course it has to be addressed and that's why I mentionned it as
> part of my review.

We agreed it has to be addressed, yes. But who should address it?

---
John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.

This message contains technical discussion involving difficult issues. No 
personal disrespect or malice is intended. If you perceive such, your 
perception is simply wrong. I'm a busy person, and in my business "go along to 
get along" causes mission failures and sometimes kills people, so I tend to be 
a bit blunt.



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

Reply via email to