On Thursday 31 January 2008, Peter Clifton wrote: > e.g. BJT with pins "B", "C" and "E" -> physical pin numbers > -> correct sequence for Spice
Spice wants C B E. That's a netlister issue. In the big picture, the schematic, symbols, etc cannot be expected to keep track of the pin ordering of all components for all targets. > It might be nice to have all new format sections follow some > similar "preamble" syntax which specifies how many lines > should be skipped over (saved for verbatim replay when > saving) if a particular version of gschem doesn't understand > this block. This way, future file-format additions could be > made in a way which doesn't preclude opening / saving from > older versions. This is why we need an externally defined neutral format. Tools don't need to use it directly, but it frees up the tools to evolve as then need to do. The only thing holding up doing it is finding someone with the time and interest to do it. _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
