Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/12/30/01:19:52
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015, John Doty wrote:
>
> On Dec 29, 2015, at 10:29 PM, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
>
>>>
>>> A common netlist/bom format with a canonical form (so equivalent netlists would be identical) would be a useful intermediate.
>>
>> Could work. To me, the current patch format is much cleaner. I already have fully working code both in pcb-rnd and gschem. If you implement an alternative solution that is at least as capable, let me know.
>
> I?m not saying get rid of your patch format. But you took a shortcut generally not available by having pcb make the patch directly.
False. I did make a shortcut, but on a totally different level of
abstraction.
Look at how these changes happen (in pcb or anywher else). There's a model
of the world in the tool; the user performs some actions; the tool
converts these actions into changes in the model.
What I realized was this: instead of applying the changes to the model and
then trying to regain the same changes by diffing two models, it's more
efficient to just save the diff. Not because pcb, not because the netlist
forma,t not because flow-specific things. Only because the actual user
input _is_ a change, and this way I can avoid converting it
forth-and-back.
I don't see any real advantage of not saving the diff but generating
the changed model and then regenerating the diff later.
> Some more general approach is needed. Common, canonical forms of netlist
> and BOM could drive patch file generation, and they could be useful for
> other things (as others have noted).
Since you failed to prove that:
- my approach was not generic
- yours is more generic
- and more generic is really needed
your conclusion is wrong.
Nevertheless, if you implement a fully working version of your approach,
unlike you, I am willing to give it a try.
- Raw text -