On Jan 14, 2009, at 6:43 PM, Joerg wrote: > But I can only say it from the position of a user, not as a > programmer because that's the domain of the experts here.
Back in 1969, I was taught that the purpose of Fortran was to erase this distinction, putting the power of the computer into the hands of the those who really understand the problems to be solved. I remain of the opinion that this is a destructive distinction to make. This tradition is alive and well in programming languages like Perl and Python (and Fortran is still used by many scientists). gEDA is part of this tradition. If, instead, you see yourself as the sort of "user" who is merely a consumer of programming, I think gEDA will never satisfy you. I also believe that the future of mixed- signal engineering will belong to those who can combine skills in applied physics with programming, as software moves into areas traditionally handled by circuits, and the complexity of designs exceeds the capacity of humans to handle without computer assistance. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
