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=4sZrxERtNa06OMNc98S71wzXc0J5YTSLd6Y1OpqmXDY=;
	b=IdK8a4JOuBA7XOryGemgO16ko1jq5zZ14dlalBIjMNfSTJGzheeAmPO5cGqOPWyjKO
	APmgdXOOH1A6bqy/LhQRXDaKP05DeLPYOSPRrAnnYU/OGXD99qrLqeiTt07bovqW0+uY
	Ex2hICvRx086SHZTgXqicjbxjPiXXj5d6MzLC9dZaQUXSTqt0fZDp9rh1stgbnPcmtt0
	SXeMHcac4ZK9Yd6L7geTyEwwR028/5byzY31ZQVkiJF1k7PA3PkGLVF1GKhIhg2nCKFI
	qSjzNVjAYsFNWzKUbfKdI2VAypqqZBVVtw1+yi0uRmsIzUMohpsiXMcIfr9mFuXaS+Lk
	357w==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.152.5.69 with SMTP id q5mr10617663laq.92.1440529875240; Tue,
	25 Aug 2015 12:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<55DCAA14.1030009@xs4all.nl>
References:	<CAM2RGhTJ-gywb3LrkKoNKUxkwJCTsJ7vRxiLtmrXa5Mnp0331w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<DUB125-W46D6798DBF674B80F24208C6620 AT phx DOT gbl>
	<6B8DDCCF-0E84-43DC-94A3-89CE0E56F0ED AT noqsi DOT com>
	<201508242052 DOT 28189 DOT ad252 AT freeelectron DOT net>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508250534570 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<3766120C-93DD-454D-B2FA-7C79B78DC86C AT noqsi DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508251403030 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<8DC5050C-49D2-49AD-94B0-A1FC857178E5 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<55DC6491 DOT 8030607 AT iae DOT nl>
	<3FA132D6-A8D9-47C8-8D37-E1962EF4098B AT noqsi DOT com>
	<55DCAA14 DOT 1030009 AT xs4all DOT nl>
Date:	Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:11:15 -0400
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhSiukLAyPK3cx90aJEe1qPNDy3xfM_aAzQQ-Z3pioqRrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Re: off-topic: daydreaming about modularization
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 t7PJBKrL008411
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 Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Bert Timmerman
(bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]
<geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> John Doty wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:50 AM, myken<myken AT iae DOT nl>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 25/08/15 14:25, John Doty wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps not so much you, but much of the “let’s make gschem better” that
>>>> I see here is really “let’s make gschem more like pcb”. And, of course, the
>>>> reason I find pcb such a horror is that it is not like gschem in its design.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Isn't the whole idea in this thread "let's make gschem/pcb more
>>> accessible”?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but the answer looks *completely* different depending on whether
>> you’re coming from a pcb (integrated tool) or geda-gaf (toolkit)
>> perspective.
>>
>>
>> John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
>> http://www.noqsi.com/
>> jpd AT noqsi DOT com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Hello John,
>
> Please enlighten me for I fail to see what makes pcb an integrated tool and
> gschem not.
>
> True gschem is part of series of tools bundled under geda-gaf, in the unix
> way they probably would have been in seperate
> repositories/.tar.gz/.rpm/.deb/whatnot.

Imagine if pcb was split up
* pcb-layout for just doing the GUI layout.
* pcb2net for people doing back annotation
* pcb2pdf for people exporting pdfs
* pcb2ps
* pcb2gcode
* pcb2bom

And now imagine the biggest difference of all. Instead of one giant
program with poorly defined boundaries between layers you had

* libpcbfile for moving between a memory representation of a layout
and the file that stores it
* libpcbgeo for processing geometric properties
* libpcbexport for translation to pdf, ps, png, jpeg
* libpcbnetlist for forward and backward annotation
* libpcbui for providing the HID interface

and etc.

> In my limited view, gschem converts user input into a .sch file versus pcb
> converts user input into a .pcb file.

Yea look at the programming styles. To put it politely one is
architected the other is evolved.

> gattrib/gschlas/gsymcheck are designed for managing attributes for a .sch
> file vs. plugins (like "teardrop") are designed for managing entities for a
> .pcb file.
>
> Then there is a bunch of exporters added in pcb to "export" the .pcb file
> into the format of need vs. gnetlist with a bunch of backends to "export"
> the .sch file into the format of need.
>
> I think gschem and pcb are very alike.
>
> If we would improve on pcb like as was done in gschem, we would probably end
> up with a "libpcb" (good) and invoking plugins (written in scheme) with
> guile-2.0.0 and all sorts of portability and/or build dependency issues
> (bad).
>
> IMHO, the gnetlist scheme backends is the best way to alienate/discourage
> "common" users (EE) without a master degree on CS (did you develop the
> secret "gnetlist+scheme-freemason-handshake" to show your membership of this
> highly elite old-boys-club) from contributing to backends/plugins, thanks
> pcb got rid of m4 footprints ... well, almost.
>
> IMHO, gnetlist backends should be written in a language of the EE's choice,
> and pcb plugins should be too (pcb-rnd is ahead on that one, congrats Igor2
> ;-).
>
> Add transparency and accessibility to all stuff in a gschem data-structure.
>
> Well, maybe it's time to convert the gschem symbol file format into m4, or
> scheme or ... nah, won't do.
>
> Just my thoughts.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Bert Timmerman.



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

- Raw text -