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=CScN7XV8o9a+ahzPSBloiOMdpoX8cC4Xf8EWNlV7oEA=; b=TI/8r7bAuUQ46uqoBm3IxL65gWSTdryFf6CbtZghmN5Ia0q6MiMBQ7GlC+/Vu6ZND7 D0++ViaOCrvBRP5DILX00sad5a/3i8D2sUIgUb5jgaInMhYRe19Vp2UhJymYefbYGP1J 7+GzP8JEIlGjeCRHSDzgMBurwhPCBvKSHXaaeh8yazSOFBsLW+b/20ueg2I16lVUMrv7 /u9r85bCRhrBecM873RlDoZF6dZ23Ft24V8LztEF45/eH5JRSWuYGnHM8eUjhzocsugW DU8JId7YKySQdZHyl9VXadxlmYORN5DMvCxCB5bIInjnUuTqRExL91jTaLSgXW1bu/83 rD0A== X-Received: by 10.180.187.170 with SMTP id ft10mr3797906wic.15.1441119221326; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 07:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 16:53:39 +0200 From: "Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] SQL PCB file format Message-Id: <20150901165339.850c50d9f3f5d5c87f58d27e@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20150826000523 DOT 353 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <55DDD4DB DOT 2060008 AT ecosensory DOT com> <20150826153031 DOT 4620 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <201508261807 DOT t7QI7sS3003191 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20150826182552 DOT 22702 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <20150831140133 DOT 2dc0456c28430ebcfb0b17b5 AT gmail DOT com> <55E4471F DOT 3010906 AT jump-ing DOT de> <20150901095807 DOT 17257 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Precedence: bulk As I see it the text below is not about fileformat instead it is about refactor to extract the functions manipulating the file and put them in a separate library. On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 10:23:39 -0400 "Russell Nelson (russnelson AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" wrote: > Indeed. PCB need not use the same interchange file format as it uses for > its native storage. But I'm not quite seeing the difficulty with the > existing file format. It's plain text, so easy to edit. It's well-known, > with a bunch of tools that manipulate it. I would say to stick with it as > both interchange and native storage. > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via > geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > > > Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: > > > >> read through source code and find all functions or similar > > > >> accessing the PCB file and put them in libpcb library file which > > > >> would be become a storage library. > > > > > > > > Pretty much all code accesses the stored data directly, no such > > > > thing like accessors or setters/getters. > > > > > > Something whispers "refactor!" in my ear... > > > > Setters/getters are perhaps the worst side effect there is in source > > code. Never introduce artificial overhead without very careful > > consideration. > > > > Data structures in memory are intended to be accessed directly and > > ideally never copied. > > > > Permanent storage is another matter. Setters/getters for files are > > all the more appropriate - and that's exactly what libpcb and edacore > > both would offer. I'm all for moving pcb file code into a libpcb. > > > > > > //Peter > >