John Doty wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2009, at 3:06 PM, Peter Clifton wrote:
>> What really pains me - is that development has pretty much stagnated -
>> because we can't seem to get _anything_ new into the suite to help
>> provide basic functionality other packages take for granted.
>
> 1. gEDA is fundam
On Nov 22, 2009, at 9:24 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>>Agreed 100%. I don't want my tools dumbed-down because some of
>
> When it comes to scripting in geda, there is not much to dumb down in
> the first place.
I think gEDA is very scriptable. Look at the amazing stuff Karel
did with t
On Nov 22, 2009, at 7:24 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:03:29 -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
>
>> On Nov 22, 2009, at 6:24 PM, you wrote:
>>> 1. There are lots of folks who whine about learning another
>>> language.
>>> "I already know TCL, so why should I learn Scheme?" As
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Peter Clifton wrote:
>
> See this old diagram Peter B and I drew:
>
> http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:data_structure_design_discussion?s=data%
> 20structure
That looks perfect to me. In fact it is almost identical to what I use
in pschem. Is there any particular re
On Nov 22, 2009, at 3:22 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>
> However, extreme flexibility comes at a price. The price is non-
> intuitive
> syntax
Every syntax is non-intuitive to somebody. The advantage of Scheme is
that it's so clean and simple you don't need much intuition. These
days you do
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:03:29 -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2009, at 6:24 PM, you wrote:
>> 1. There are lots of folks who whine about learning another language.
>> "I already know TCL, so why should I learn Scheme?" As John Doty says,
>> this attitude stinks.
The very same John D. co
On Sunday 22 November 2009 16:01:04 John Doty wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Mark Stanley wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 09:41 -0700, John Doty wrote:
> >> But what is it about engineers that I hear constantly "I don't want
> >> to learn..." from them? So unprofessional. For something com
On Nov 22, 2009, at 7:03 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> PCB's scripting language is, of course, C :-)
>
> Most systems come with a script compiler called "gcc" too.
You're a mean, bad man. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
___
geda-u
PCB's scripting language is, of course, C :-)
Most systems come with a script compiler called "gcc" too.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
I've gotta jump in with my $0.02 here.
On Nov 22, 2009, at 6:24 PM, you wrote:
> 1. There are lots of folks who whine about learning another
> language. "I already know TCL, so why should I learn Scheme?" As
> John Doty says, this attitude stinks. It implies that the person with
> this att
> Why have we so much scheme in gEDA?
Back when Ales was architecting the gEDA suite, he make gschem the GUI
program which allowed one to draw a schematic. It only held the
concepts of graphical objects like line, arc, net segment, text, etc.
He created a separate program, gnetlist, which held a
Can you please check if there is an effect of option -enable-m4lib-png
for latest pcb20091103 snapshot.
On AMD64 I have not manage to get the png pictures of footprints. Of
course I do not need or want them, but we have to decide if we give
gentoo users this option (USEFLAG). (I have to admit that
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:25:43 +, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> The downside is, it would make communication with peers more difficult.
Just wanted to add, that I have been cursed eagle more than once for the
obstacles they put into peer-to-peer communication. With eagle you can
easily share a p
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:32:08 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
>> Scheme is one of the simplest programming languages there is.
It's simplicity is much like the game of go -- Just four short rules need
to be obeyed. Yet, the actual game is so complex that computers have yet
to consistently beat top
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:33:54 -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> Keeping the data primitives separated until the last minute would make
> external scripting easier and more consistent,
The downside is, it would make communication with peers more difficult.
Currently, I can pass heavy symbols and the co
You could also try some of the links at [1]http://www.schemers.org
(* jcl *)
--
You can't create open hardware with closed EDA tools.
twitter: [2]http://twitter.com/jluciani
blog:[3]http://www.luciani.org
References
1. http://www.schemers.org/
2. http://twitter.com/jl
On Nov 22, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Mark Stanley wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 09:41 -0700, John Doty wrote:
>> But what is it about engineers that I hear constantly "I don't want
>> to learn..." from them? So unprofessional. For something complex and
>> obfuscated, the time factor comes in, but Schem
Bill Gatliff writes:
> Stephan Boettcher wrote:
>> Remotely related to this topic, I had this idea:
>>
>> Often, there are several choices for footprint, model, whatever
>> attribute that need to to chosen at some point in the flow. We have
>> proposals
>> for a kind of database to support the
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:32:48 -0500 (EST)
> From: myjunk stuff
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB: AutoRouter (Stefan Salewski)
> To: gEDA user mailing list
> Message-ID:
>
<18804493.189581.1258900368473.javamail.carzr...@mail.srv.lgcyny1.cv.n
et>
>
>
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 09:41 -0700, John Doty wrote:
> But what is it about engineers that I hear constantly "I don't want
> to learn..." from them? So unprofessional. For something complex and
> obfuscated, the time factor comes in, but Scheme is one of the
> simplest programming languages there is
Hi all,
Bert Timmerman wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Vincent Onelli wrote:
>> From: Steven Michalske
>> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Teardrop plugin
>> To: gEDA user mailing list
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> On Nov 19, 2009, at 6:03 AM, Vincent Onelli wrote:
>> > Hello,
>>
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 09:41 -0700, John Doty wrote:
>
> But what is it about engineers that I hear constantly "I don't want
> to learn..." from them? So unprofessional. For something complex and
> obfuscated, the time factor comes in, but Scheme is one of the
> simplest programming language
On Nov 20, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Steven Michalske wrote:
>
> On Nov 20, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Stuart Brorson wrote:
>
>> As an alternative to scheme, some would prefer to see TCL. I have no
>> problem with that, as long as the interpreter is built-in. However,
>> there is a large installed base of sche
> I'm not sure why, but I assume it has something to do with prejudice
> against java. Regards,
> Kurt
I use Java for most of my programming, it's pretty good. BTW, have you
seen jFreeChart? Very nice graphing package.
gene
___
geda-user mailing
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:56:34 +0100
> From: Stefan Salewski
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB: AutoRouter
> To: gEDA user mailing list
> Message-ID: <1258847794.4126.40.ca...@amd64-x2>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 12:40 +1300, Antho
(Cc: psc...@googlegroups.com)
I've been recently working on my own schematic editor, pschem, which
is based on a slightly different circuit design paradigm than gEDA. In
particular, it is built around a design database that abstracts an API
for accessing and manipulating the circuit description. T
sorry for that - somehow my email client went all squirrelly and didn't
display the message content. You can ignore this take 2 version.
gene
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Wow - what happened to my last email? OK, here's another attempt . . .
I am working on a program, and it has a side benefit that displays the
schematic hierarchy. Is that something anyone could use?
Here's a sample output:
./ampzilla-base_pg1.sch
./S2/fpga_pg1.sch
./S2/fpga_pg2.sch
./S2/fpga_
I'm working on something, and a side effect of it outputs the schematic
hierarchy. Is this useful to anyone?
The syntax is '.' is the top-most directory of the schematic. '/'
separates the paths and the schematic name. So, for example,
./schematic1.sch is a schematic located at the root of th
29 matches
Mail list logo
