On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 00:22 -0400, evan foss wrote: > That is so cool. I can't wait to see it with say tabs.
Thanks. I just posted another example - with an idea of how buses "might" be represented. (This takes buses further than their current, graphical existence) > > What views / information could / should be presented in this browser? > > (Are there any other types of object we need to see listed? - I know I > > missed buses - should these come under "nets"? > > I might suggest that it also have the ability to search for a given > object or value in the tree. Like a filter, or a search. This is possible. > What would be really really cool but very hard would be to add a > search with connection or relative location to another. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this, but if it is along the lines of searching for a "resistor" connected to "this object", that could be useful. I'm not sure how the user would specify the search though. > I would also add further subcategories because I can see that getting > very cluttered. For a large digital design it would be nice to group > all the 0.1uF caps. It gets difficult to solve all cases. Grouping by component, e.g. collecting all components using "resistor-2.sym", or "capacitor-1.sym", could be a start. I'm not sure about automatically grouping things by "part number", or "value". Grouping "could" be customisable by plug-in, but it would be much more complex to implement. > > Is this useful to real users - or just as a test of libgeda hooking? > > (This will determine how much effort is put into polishing it) > > I would use it but I would like to be able to turn it off when dealing > with subcircuit blocks. I never get that complex. Turn off what- the grouping? > > Should sub-circuits expand hierarchically in the browser? (My instinct > > is "no" for now. > > I agree that would lead to a real mess and defeat the purpose of > having subcircuits. They exist so you can just deal with larger > blocks. The 3D-Cad package I occasionally use can expand sub-components. I'm not sure how well it would work with schematics though - and its certainly simpler to code without the expansion. Thanks for the comments, -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
