On 5 June 2015 at 11:54, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:31:06PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: >> On 6/5/2015 2:00 PM, Andy Peters wrote: >> > >> > *snip * >> >> *snip* Trying to provide a fully defined symbol >> for every transistor would be a huge under taking. Our solution may not >> be ideal but I'm not sure I want to sift through thousands (tens of >> thousands?) of transistor part numbers to find what I'm looking for. > > You should never have to sift! We need to create a standardized way to > write description that is easily searched. This is how I manage my > library - it's quite large, but I know how the descriptions work and I > can just start typing what I'm looking for. > >> I wonder how well Henner's component chooser search code would handle >>that >> number of symbols. > > Optimize it if it can't! Searching through even *millions* of data > points is a solved problem in computing.
As I said, I wouldn't worry about that. In my day-job I am working with billions of things to search from, so this is peanuts. -h _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
