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=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=I/8jwGJN+ecyBHYh80r83X6hqiqZ4n6vQZ/YjGnCtRc=;
	b=YBFUSrWLmg9Zr0FRYoH2T1K6vMI9GD3L4pMFd9ixcIbaOIi5yJzKPPMeMa/cZaa4w3
	6A52NiGihMlffvIopIMPId3KnTfxjX4/dl/fNiibEnVL+jZACww3YHeQZzrGWXTEaR1f
	Pz5ltTyzwkOYlXDiRi8Z85xRmwpMQIf/7pwpAJqaRHh8bC1DfYJHQPyOrnyCAfm1QtcW
	QSVR1XidGVJ+ln/ouakTeiuN/IXQV53BwMObSu0hAuRiQmG0ymXLppWHS+a6sLLtUAqR
	xr9u+0rRoh2B1GwIAbExKz4USwvcy69SrcV6rL56WV0QUeLQdLiRRgzHWoxvvyWfyix4
	BvCQ==
X-Received:	by 10.195.18.5 with SMTP id gi5mr31383293wjd.0.1441050941210;
	Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:55:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Mon, 31 Aug 2015 21:55:39 +0200
From:	"Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] back annotation proposal (RFC)
Message-Id:	<20150831215539.fd46c4ac380238d390a596cd@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1508311624440.6924@igor2priv>
References:	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508301838470 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<201508301802 DOT t7UI2twS031311 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhRgPQG2WDFVb0SFvMbypyYKS2oYtD=851WHR6fOB4iWdA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201508310341 DOT t7V3fcfh022966 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508310637471 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<CAM2RGhTTO60Efn2kdGS56s0naHGPdrRBePaOaQFbJTba4JQyrw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508311624440 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version:	1.0
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

As I see the problem either change is sent immidiately to the other program or there must be mechanism to tell if a change should be forward annotated or back annotated, this might be done manually with button/scripts/...

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 16:31:52 +0200 (CEST)
gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> 
> > This might be a good place to throw GPMI in again. Like I have said in
> > other threads scheme needs to be phased out.
> 
> 
> The most problematic part of my back annotation plans is how to get gschem 
> to do what I want. I was considering using GPMI in "parasite" mode: 
> injecting the whole thing as an LD_PRELOAD lib at the GTK API.
> 
> Pros: 0 modification in gschem, still can hook init, uninit, the main 
> loop and random gtk API, separate code base.
> 
> Cons: I can not hook in function calls where gschem code is calling gschem 
> C functions or scheme code calling gschem C functions. One of the minor 
> features I'd need to add would be a way to add an extra mark or highlight 
> on some object, like pins, to mark they are in netlist mismatch due to 
> back annotation. I could easily find the part of the pin drawing code 
> where I'd need to add a 2 or 3 lines. I could easily wrap this function in 
> another that calls it and then does the extra steps for the extra 
> highlighting. But this method wouldn't work for internal gschem->gschem 
> calls.
> 
> So GPMI alone wouldn't solve my main problem here; once my main problem is 
> solved, the rest could be done in plain C, with or without GPMI.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Igor2

- Raw text -