Mail Archives: geda-user/2016/02/29/11:54:38
> > gschem: hackish and limited, most of the limitations stem from
> > design, but it actually does its job surprisingly well on the
> > common daily stuff.
>
> And on the uncommon stuff, too. Today's task is to assemble a SPICE
> file that, combined with other scripts, will allow a test engineer
> to plot the expected scope traces for a given configuration of an
> instrument with many configuration options.
Perhaps drawing a schematic for a spice simulation is common daily
stuff, then.
> > When I need something new and strange, it's a PITA to add,
>
> But at least you *can*:
Hey, it's software, at least you *can* rewrite it to do anything. You
missed the message completely: It's *difficult* to do. Perhaps you
could put some effort into making it easier?
> > because some of the most trivial and basic concepts are missing by design.
>
> And that is the Unix design philosophy,
It's a poor philosophy when it results in a tool that's missing
"trivial and basic concepts". It's a like a "cat" command that can't
take more than one input file.
Any please stop with the "ancient unix philosophy" argument. If the
tool is difficult to use by the target users, something is wrong. Why
not find out what's causing the difficulty and try to fix it, instead
of putting the onus on the users to figure out what philosophy they
should have adopted?
> But networks shouldn't exist. Having gschem understand networks is
> like cat -v. Networks are gnetlist's job. Fundamentally, gschem
> edits pages, not circuits.
Fundamentally, gschem edits schematics, not pages. Dumbing it down to
"just editing pages" is like using Microsoft Paint to do architectural
design. Sure, it works, but it's not smart enough to work well.
> > and that "scheme is so great that everyone must learn it", etc.
>
> Scheme is just another programming language. Guile is a rather
> undisciplined implementation of it. It's not wonderful, but it's not
> a barrier unless you make it one.
It's a barrier because it has an intrinsic learning curve that must be
assigned a cost and priority. It makes it difficult for people to
justify using gEDA *at all* because the cost of adoption is that much
higher. Pointing out that this cost is *expected of everyone* doesn't
help.
> Gschem is a page editor.
Too bad it's not a schematic editor. That would be useful.
- Raw text -