Re: gEDA-user: Icarus verilog Synthesis

2010-09-09 Thread Ronald Mathias
Hi, Does any one know about any book that describes how to convert a behavioral code into unoptimized gate level netlist. I know that after an unoptimized gate level netlist is got logic synthesis is applied to get an optimized netlist. I have a book called Algorithms for

gEDA-user: Rendering code [WAS: Re: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0]

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 01:00 +0100, Peter Clifton wrote: > > To do this, we would have to use a single renderer, no? For example, have > > OpenGL do the viewport drawing in all of Gtk, LessTIF, (Windows?), etc? Re-reading your comment.. No, we don't necessarily have to use a single renderer. The c

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 10:17 -0700, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > > (You may notice I've started in a few places pulling common drawing code > > into a common_* prefix under the hid/ folder). My aim was to set it up > > such that the GUIs could take or leave various bits of the common > > rendering code

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 10:17 -0700, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 05:53:34PM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote: > > > > The renderer can have non-OO helper functions too I guess, but it felt > > odd putting that into a file with a widget implementation. I had hoped > > to keep it one fi

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Andrew Poelstra
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 05:53:34PM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote: > > The renderer can have non-OO helper functions too I guess, but it felt > odd putting that into a file with a widget implementation. I had hoped > to keep it one file for GDK specific, and one file for GL specific code. > > I'm sti

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 08:41 -0700, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 12:34:11PM +0200, Frank Bergmann wrote: > > On 09.09.2010 11:54, Peter Clifton wrote: > > >I'm not sure I see the point of making the whole top-level window a > > >dedicated widget per-se, although the goal to encap

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 08:37 -0700, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > > I was never really sure what point to start sub-classing to make a new > > widget. My acid test was usually whether that widget had useful > > self-contained functionality which could be re-used in other places. > > > > For example, I'v

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Andrew Poelstra
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 11:41:56AM +0200, Frank Bergmann wrote: > On 09.09.2010 02:46, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > >Well, I am converting the top-level window to its own widget, rather than > >using a stock GtkWindow and tacking stuff onto it. That way I can migrate > >a lot of the global variables to

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Andrew Poelstra
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 12:34:11PM +0200, Frank Bergmann wrote: > On 09.09.2010 11:54, Peter Clifton wrote: > >I'm not sure I see the point of making the whole top-level window a > >dedicated widget per-se, although the goal to encapsulate various state > >variables sounds excellent. > > > >I was n

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Andrew Poelstra
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 10:54:37AM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote: > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 17:46 -0700, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > > > Well, I am converting the top-level window to its own widget, rather than > > using a stock GtkWindow and tacking stuff onto it. That way I can migrate > > a lot of the

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Frank Bergmann
On 09.09.2010 11:54, Peter Clifton wrote: I'm not sure I see the point of making the whole top-level window a dedicated widget per-se, although the goal to encapsulate various state variables sounds excellent. I was never really sure what point to start sub-classing to make a new widget. My acid

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 17:14 -0700, Steven Michalske wrote: > On Sep 7, 2010, at 9:01 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > > >> Shall we / I push this? I think it looks good overall. > > > > I desparately need to push out a release to get the LF work > > "published" in order to close it out. Maybe I'll d

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 11:41 +0200, Frank Bergmann wrote: > On 09.09.2010 02:46, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > > Well, I am converting the top-level window to its own widget, rather than > > using a stock GtkWindow and tacking stuff onto it. That way I can migrate > > a lot of the global variables to mem

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Peter Clifton
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 17:46 -0700, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > Well, I am converting the top-level window to its own widget, rather than > using a stock GtkWindow and tacking stuff onto it. That way I can migrate > a lot of the global variables to member variables, pass more things as > parameters, a

Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

2010-09-09 Thread Frank Bergmann
On 09.09.2010 02:46, Andrew Poelstra wrote: Well, I am converting the top-level window to its own widget, rather than using a stock GtkWindow and tacking stuff onto it. That way I can migrate a lot of the global variables to member variables, pass more things as parameters, and use the 'const' ke