On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:55 PM, Vladimir Zhbanov <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:32:45PM +0000, Evan Foss wrote: > ... >> What were your thoughts about modularity? > > Using SCM_DEFINE everywhere, making sure all C functions have guile > mates. Making gnetlist, gschlas, gsymcheck and all to be a guile modules > which the user could use everywhere, say, just by writing > (use-modules (geda netlist))
Picture me in stunned silence for a minute. ok minute over. >> Regarding geda-gaf and gtk+ I think we need to be more modular so that >> changes in gtk+ require less of a rewrite. > > Honestly, I don't understand this sentence, sorry. If you really want to understand please read on but keep in mind I was mostly thinking out loud. First I want to say at the current time this is a deep blue sky idea. Basically I want gschem to have changeable HIDs like PCB but better. The idea being that gtk migrations or changes off of gtk would be easier. gtk itself used to be great but it has gone off on some weird bends lately. I am not a fan of QT ether. Eventually something else will happen merging both of them or replacing at least one and I want to be able to easily slot something else in there. > Cheers, > Vladimir > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -- Home http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/ Work http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/ -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
