X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.9.0 07/11/2018 (debian 1:2.9.0-1) with nmh-1.7.1
X-Exmh-Isig-CompType: repl
X-Exmh-Isig-Folder: inbox
From: "karl AT aspodata DOT se [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] tools for sub pcbs
In-reply-to: <87ttyjyvnr.fsf@lepton.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
References: <20230314184208 DOT 7302885F61C5 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <87y1nvz5s0 DOT fsf AT lepton DOT mail-host-address-is-not-set> <20230317183608 DOT 91AEC85F61C8 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <87ttyjyvnr DOT fsf AT lepton DOT mail-host-address-is-not-set>
Comments: In-reply-to "vzh (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
   message dated "Fri, 17 Mar 2023 22:40:45 +0300."
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <20230318083329.E1B7885F61C8@turkos.aspodata.se>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2023 09:33:29 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
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

Vladimir:
> "karl AT aspodata DOT se [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> writes:
> 
> > Why then don't we cooperate on making sch2pcb great ?
> > Do you want to convert it to scheme or still doing things in C ?
> > Tell me your plans with it.
> 
> I'm working towards converting the program to Scheme as it is a higher
> level language than C and it allows for better testing and faster
> progress.  Thereafter I'm planning to transform two related
> lepton-netlist backends to so named (newly introduced) 'module
> backends', which will give us a chance to replace system calls in the
> program with just using available Scheme functions.  The base for it has
> been added recently, I just need some time and motivation to go ahead.
> One discouraging fact for C lovers is I work towards converting most of
> C to Scheme.  I, for one, like C.  OTOH, I like Scheme much better.  In
> this particular case, IMO, the C code is overcomplicated, and any work
> on it takes much more time compared to what I could spend if I did it in
> Scheme.
> 
> In two words, since about two or three years ago I had a new Scheme
> prototype version of the program.  I realized then, that it is not good
> enough tested and I need much more work on testing it in order to offer
> it to the users.  If I do all testing myself, it'll spend much more
> time to come to some result :-)

Why not laeve sch2pcb as is and develop the scheme version instead,
perhaps we could call it lepton-2pcb (lepton implies sch so that is 
redundant) or have it as a menu item in the schematic prg. ?

I can do testing and possible some scheme but I'm not fluid in scheme,
just tell me what to do.

From what I have guessed, my goal, the program should do:
. read lepton and pcb configs to find the libs.
 Unfortunately pcb has three config files:  pcbrc preferences  settings,
 which one has the final say about libs ?

. read the sch file, find refdes and fp or refdes and source attributes
. do a netlist as usual

. find the footprint file[s]
. find the source file[s]

Unfortunately neither sch and pcb file formats resolve the
issue of files with the same name in different directories.

. put all fp's in the *.new.pcb file as usual
. get the source files pcb sibling, adj. refdes (add the source files 
  refdes) and save it in the same dir as the orig. sch file

and then possible:

. remove not used fp in the target pcb file
. write out a nice message to the user

or tell pcb that
. there is fp's remove
. there is fp's to add
. there is subpcbs to add

///

An extension to the last part, is that pcb could tell lepton to
. change an attribute of a symbol
. change some connections

///

All the above goes for pcb-rnd also if possible.

Regards,
/Karl Hammar