X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Mime-Version:	1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Find rat lines
From:	John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<CAC4O8c_YzeqQ84huGrZPL+=aK5C89phD3VgRHko40N8hWCzw7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 Dec 2012 17:04:57 -0700
Message-Id:	<95896B46-44E5-40BA-AB8F-2A81E6073CAD@noqsi.com>
References:	<20121204183305 DOT 6b04c0dc AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org> <20121208112649 DOT 388a9d22 AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org> <1355011808 DOT 19390 DOT 8 DOT camel AT localhost> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1212090407031 DOT 26605 AT igor2priv> <1355188647 DOT 12937 DOT 14 DOT camel AT localhost> <A7B4EDBD-3704-4837-9350-A16559C60A2A AT noqsi DOT com> <201212140010 DOT qBE0ABjV023762 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <172CCAAB-0423-43EF-8A04-5A9961F1D5B9 AT noqsi DOT com> <201212140122 DOT qBE1MoKM019255 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <5AA18F19-2EA9-4E7D-9378-F768D8E1E5DD AT jump-ing DOT de> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1212140501300 DOT 26605 AT igor2priv> <50CB5D82 DOT 8060507 AT jump-ing DOT de> <E5DE4486-B23F-4945-943A-F46C6E308B90 AT noqsi DOT com> <201212141820 DOT qBEIKQDN005665 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <43147C45-75A5-4393-AB07-AFBFD7BD09BA AT noqsi DOT com> <CAC4O8c_YzeqQ84huGrZPL+=aK5C89phD3VgRHko40N8hWCzw7A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer:	Apple Mail (2.1085)
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id qBF054Et015238
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

On Dec 14, 2012, at 4:18 PM, Britton Kerin wrote:

>> 
>> In my experience with pcb, it's all punishment and confusion. It's impossible to get the program to do anything *simple*. Instead, it tries to read the user's mind, frequently getting it wrong. And it isn't just me: a couple of years ago I had an experienced professional engineer working for me. One of his tasks was learning pcb (I was thinking, OK, maybe it's just one of those things a simple-minded physicist can't get). He failed.
>> 
> 
> I find this really surprising, since for me pcb was the simple part of gEDA
> to learn.  It was the combination of figuring out which attributes had to
> be set in gschem, how symbols and footprints connected together, and how
> the whole arrangement was propagated into pcb that was painful.

But gschem is so easy to understand. Everything is accessible. Select a symbol, Hs, and you can see its construction down to the level of individual primitives. Primitives are simple things, pretty easy to understand. Modify any attribute. Add new attributes. Draw lines, text, whatever. Encapsulate arbitrary complexity in a symbol with hierarchy. Make it work for you.

> Since you don't use pcb, I'm curious: is it pcb itself that causes confusion,
> or are the above issues bothering you and/or this other engineer?

In pcb you cannot do anything simple, and you cannot deconstruct complexity to understand it. Complex objects are not constructed of simple objects. There are no simple objects. Object properties are immutable and inscrutable. Normally, I'd figure I was "fighting the paradigm", slap myself a few times, and get on with it. But there isn't a paradigm I can recognize here. It reminds me of navigation in downtown Boston, with streets that don't represent any sort of plan.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com

- Raw text -