X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-CMAE-Analysis:	v=2.4 cv=YI9adTKx c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=5fd283cc
	a=+cj0cO56Fp8x7EdhTra87A==:117 a=3FZmVVBqTM2lB6zO+K5PKw==:17
	a=9+rZDBEiDlHhcck0kWbJtElFXBc=:19 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19
	a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=zTNgK-yGK50A:10 a=a1KZgU7cAAAA:8 a=Mj1Xp5F7AAAA:8
	a=9HZKIJSWRZNiXCHf2vEA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=ng0hpkU2jXKPaRTLMVYJ:22
	a=OCttjWrK5_uSHO_3Hkg-:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT:	glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=epilitimus.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:
	In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:
	Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:
	Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:
	List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
	bh=mF9xmj5L4O45NyEmoA5Oa9MwCuv5Wu5NcypX5+8MNQU=; b=ABm2Dd/LlEB95S+8y6IfNYvYSd
	cP3BrRzOp1tNL5q5T8+LSHZPUT6m2H3bzB0KFNa+ga8OBVuyhfK6Zrd3JXbM1szz0CHY0/AHqiM/R
	NV9Ws9SvGr4Oc899gbP5vq7JM7jmWHCY+m4XCP1kbz/OsX1O7MvwWsoOCD7VjeyYcz1qkD9rJMB/C
	Z6p0CdXJXWSchD8ghQ+qQxwMRvax286ka7Kp1OLhzvztmJxPwc6SjUXZTFOavkcBWhiAqF0gAqCYJ
	SlU9nn5wKB76uX9MkYSojZxAuFp7F2RfvaiZnLcjVTVYZUt7C23MmttW5nYh40LibWSbTG5dheXbL
	r+ABzN3A==;
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] SAB processing patches
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<e4ff3c96-939b-a93e-a32f-5e938b6daa63 AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2011302045040 DOT 2894 AT nimbus>
	<20201130220505 DOT 0AE4282C54FD AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
	<7c75ed03-456c-b408-8b50-0448f6b3a04f AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012011606400 DOT 6785 AT nimbus>
	<1b2c64b3-6a36-c1f3-dd54-bb583c6bea17 AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012021253440 DOT 1262 AT nimbus>
	<475f980e-fddd-60d1-9a02-a5bc5fb5805b AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012071333290 DOT 3907 AT nimbus>
	<e6c5135f-b127-fd55-91b2-79aa357a5a07 AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012081644480 DOT 3649 AT nimbus>
	<acfe8649-67d3-300b-2e58-a9936467199b AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<25887669-D8C1-48B8-BEE7-13EEBFC4D006 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<7f074abb-e7ae-275c-ee49-d06fc7f2a706 AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<D7588E29-0443-4C3A-AC08-A09CEB23ED1E AT noqsi DOT com>
	<e1e1f635-111e-583f-e07a-d4f7edf5dfcb AT epilitimus DOT com>
	<CCBE214F-C01B-4C34-88EA-2E915DC96762 AT noqsi DOT com>
From:	"Glenn (glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Message-ID:	<836e84ad-aa1d-fa56-5996-7445d92e94db@epilitimus.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:23:19 -0800
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
	Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.3
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<CCBE214F-C01B-4C34-88EA-2E915DC96762@noqsi.com>
X-AntiAbuse:	This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse:	Primary Hostname - a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net
X-AntiAbuse:	Original Domain - delorie.com
X-AntiAbuse:	Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse:	Sender Address Domain - epilitimus.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via:	a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net: authenticated_id: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Authenticated-Sender:	a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-CMAE-Envelope:	MS4xfK7wX7/RZHWvl9ZsNWJvRFGyA845LOuxlf6qgX4Dte4RgQI2wTOizYnyx30rszIC/PU7x7XLDS9F/S0T3ELH1pNLMUHNOdG3ASXmbMUH18IHt23aaaCA
	sblyzc3Ep5J2rGLJWkB4y2G6dmmFymr4vQ4OgQQB+97GiZ2tPl/c0i4k9nLwE8PN+M4he/qszvzs7B3F5o+1C2oKx4njpytUDGK5uS0CJCe3qxaJ/3G9uWmJ
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

John Doty wrote:
>
>
>> On Dec 9, 2020, at 8:01 PM, Glenn (glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
>> <mailto:glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com>) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com
>> <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com
>> <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>> wrote:
>>
>> Okay so I think I now understand the direction you are coming at this
>> from. However, I think there are use cases you are not taking into
>> account. For instance perhaps I need to use a verilog simulator instead
>> of spice. Or maybe I am using a proprietary simulator that only uses
>> some non-spice netlist.
>
> Then you add the appropriate annotations and support files for *that*
> approach, and use an appropriate netlister. spice-noqsi lets you draw
> what you’re intending to build and annotate it for simulation in
> SPICE. There’s no reason you can’t have annotations for other
> simulators if you have a back end that understands them.
>
Or you can make them once in a backend independent manner.
>> I also disagree that the component should not be in the schematic. Some
>> users may be like me and prefer to see it. Others may be like you and
>> prefer not to.
>
> Remember, the schematics you publish to layout, manufacturing, QA,
> field supports, etc. need to be generally comprehensible. Simulation
> schematics are like a prototype, with extra wires tacked on and
> plugged into a specialized test fixture. spice-noqsi supports test
> fixtures in several ways. Test schematics with arbitrary connections
> may be fed to the netlister along with selected board schematics.
> Unlike earlier SPICE netlisters in gEDA, spice-noqsi can use hierarchy
> in a way that’s compatible with board design, making modular design
> and simulation work fluently.
>
> But I approve of any add-ons to either gEDA or Lepton that support
> other flows. However, as a Lepton user, I do not want to see special
> jimcracks and geegaws added to Lepton to support specific flows: those
> belong in add-ons. spice-noqsi did not require any special code to
> support it. And who knows, I might return to gEDA at some point.
>
As far as I am aware gEDA and Lepton maintain independent code bases.
None of my work touches Lepton. Certainly not by my action.

I have a drawer full of screwdrivers in my tool box. Each has their
role, some quite specialized. The fact that they differ in various
respects do not make any of them useless. Same with pliers, hammers, and
wrenches. Sure I could rebuild an engine with a single screwdriver and a
pair of pliers but why would I want to?
>>
>> Certainly if we are working on a circuit that has optional real world
>> sections we want to see those as part of the schematic but still be able
>> to mix and match them in both the simulation and non simulation contexts.
>
> I do that by putting my test fixtures on separate schematics. It’s
> analogous to testing hardware on the bench. 
>
>>
>> I am not advocating getting rid of anything that geda-gaf currently
>> offers.
>
> Except clean modularity, with specialized objectives served by
> optional scripts.
Which is precisely what SAB provides with the 'exec' action, a hook for
user defined scripts.
>
>> I think SAB adds to it, just like spice-noqsi does. Both provide
>> the user with tools, and in both cases the tools are completely optional
>> and up to the user to employ or not as they see fit.
>
> If you need changes to the core code, every user is using your changes
> whether they choose to or not.
If that is a generally held concern it can be addressed with a simple
configure switch, either as an opt in or an opt out, whichever is deemed
most appropriate.

Glenn

- Raw text -