X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at neurotica.com
X-NSA-prism-xkeyscore: I do not consent to surveillance, prick
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com;
	s=default; t=1436456471;
	bh=b20iFRquxz76CfHZTqgPpOXdR1TyvzYctmXEV/txFm0=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To;
	b=PA8JFlRfpKx8tGjjMDRUYr3kCuDZCu1s3ckYs1HrMafZhmPuNZahlDpkGwZOAx6aF
	 12ytrGJgfJap6keSqQd0ushIx1LKOHx55ZRqgdXYThiv1syRCuXr9jvWazK4mXjmpo
	 08cHN+m+Tkr4PNA7nYZKao/9d3MuEFKlrufsRF+k=
Message-ID: <559E9616.1020706@neurotica.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 11:41:10 -0400
From: "Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Back annotation
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>	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1507091404410 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>	<44FED82A-8277-427B-87A8-FBC5E9A3D0E5 AT noqsi DOT com>	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1507091601150 DOT 1892 AT nimbus>	<11988591-8CA7-4132-B14A-21A53895E63E AT noqsi DOT com>	<559E8975 DOT 9050805 AT neurotica DOT com> <CAM2RGhQ-dg1BNyZZZXN2m2=3LHE=-W6JLYMBouh=6fdxi7gH6Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM2RGhQ-dg1BNyZZZXN2m2=3LHE=-W6JLYMBouh=6fdxi7gH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t69Ffp0E030313
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On 07/09/2015 11:26 AM, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>>>>> If you’re just making changes until a diff shows nothing, it doesn’t matter whether you make them upstream or downstream. Just quit when you have a match!
>>>>
>>>> This sounds reasonable to me.  So the common denominator is to load a "target netlist" into gschem and show the differences between the current state and the target state, either by highlighting them in the schematic or by showing a diff?  This shouldn't be too difficult to implement.
>>>
>>> Not into gschem. Keep gschem clean, please. I just displayed a diff in a terminal window.
>>
>>   Why are you assuming that adding this (or anything else!) will
>> automatically make gschem "dirty"?
> 
> It would be dirty. It breaks the unix mentality by integrating too
> much stuff into one program and violates the otherwise clean symmetry
> we are going for in workflow.
> 
> Forward the flow is
> gschem -> sch file -> gnetlist -> netlist file -> pcb
> gschem -> sch file -> gsch2pcb -> pcb file -> pcb
> 
> the reverse should be something like
> pcb -> pcb file -> pcb2netlist -> netlist file -> netlist2gsch -> sch
> file -> gschem
> pcb -> pcb file -> pcb2sch -> sch file -> gschem
> 
> See how each tool only does on step. That is one of the principles
> that make gEDA great. Integrating more stuff into one program is more
> like what kicad would do.

  Yes I'm quite familiar with (and applaud) the UNIX many-small-tools
philosophy.  Making these sorts of connections between these "small"
(using the world loosely) programs in real time, at runtime, rather than
connected by files and doing them separately, does not violate this
philosophy.  If it did, UNIX would not have pipes.

              -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA