On Monday 07 September 2015, Felix Salfelder wrote: > you are right about e_subckt, the distance between > SUBCKT_BASE and DEV_SUBCKT is small enough, and i could just > use the existing base. however, i still need an inheritable > MODEL_SUBCKT. do you agree? i will prepare another patch..
sort of. Before the use of the dispatcher, I would have agreed completely. I considered it, but got distracted to make the dispatcher system and plugin system. Now, I think the whole MODEL hierarchy is unnecessary baggage that should be phased out. It's a remnant of SPICE. The uninstantiated static element that is cloned substitutes for the MODEL. The ability to have behavioral models in commons (bm_*) is another way to deal with different behavior for the same type (SPICE levels, VHDL multiple architectures for an entity). So perhaps all uses of MODEL_SUBCKT should become DEV_SUBCKT? _______________________________________________ Gnucap-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucap-devel
