X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=07zkbno4+thwNUwab2bfd+yzUGKdqValTPIeFHYc6pg=;
	b=jaREcobm8TWpKsUg8NQDqp8KM7fxbQQAj+l5pxRfJgS4Ny7BbwUoCjZZLxS5BRXrsh
	hM88sPtCs5cE6B8go3mI4LXIZDXMDwKPfDA5gGJvK1PEvJuHvuP8PukmwF7wOpA0TzJ9
	VWSX1Z9NomEzUkTIoruLbJzuLX5XziG8JEj2kzCTRBxKAGxwVzLRmF9bnLeJ/eLbNcuy
	QhonRZ90lIqZ6MpKRCp9MKH6zwB+baYze+d2UK8QaNnrBmQ+CJh+LRJLsBS9cwcuLLv6
	X/dros8Jks944/dQg9x5TiW9agO84YI3U9CvZBodOgtlbW21S8WuOcmZarOvnpXtzGdH
	JoBQ==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.112.212.9 with SMTP id ng9mr16433825lbc.57.1436471121345;
	Thu, 09 Jul 2015 12:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<559EC10F.3010301@ecosensory.com>
References:	<CAM2RGhTpfbqM7zNn72TBOjeL7B7LPT1PxSEU3+9aDdChFrPFTg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1507090507530 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1507091329350 DOT 3444 AT nimbus>
	<559E86A4 DOT 3040109 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<DC183265-AD4B-4707-970F-1EE5D3578126 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<559EC10F DOT 3010301 AT ecosensory DOT com>
Date:	Thu, 9 Jul 2015 15:45:21 -0400
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhR3gk9z-5r2VZTC02JV4CDZr_RZd1wjjwX8Ut=+HUdHUg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Back annotation
From:	"Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t69JjPLX020358
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

DJ ; I favour #2 for all the philisophical reasons I already mentioned
plus the geda advantage over kicad is that it scales well to larger
designs. gEDA should only be similar enought to share some libraries
for moving content back and forth but not so similar that workflow and
etc are the same, otherwise there is no point in having two parallel
projects.

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:44 PM, John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com> wrote:
> On 07/09/2015 11:48 AM, John Doty wrote:
>>
>> For my ASIC designs, the parameter extracted netlists are about 200x the
>> size of the netlists generated from the schematics.
>> Printed circuit designs are generally flatter, but back-annotation into
>> even a simple circuit still looks impractical to me.
>> There’s really no utility to it anyway: the netlist is what you need as
>> input for your verification process.
>
>
> I can see how a 200x the lines of netlist result might stop you, but There
> is always utility possible in scripting
> the extraction of and reduction of raw data into a sum, with heuristics, for
> sizing drive transistors - whether
> in a chip logic fanout or a power supply.  Perhaps you're stopping at the
> netlist because of some detail
> of your method, but reducing a flat layout extraction netlist to useful
> annotations is the definition of utility to me.
> And it doesn't bother me if that script is GUI button connected either.  It
> should be easy to change it is all.
> Different strokes...
>
>



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -