On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 00:10 +0000, r wrote: > On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Peter Clifton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Fair enough. I'm not particularly attached to the current > configuration mechanism (although setting callbacks without this could > be difficult). I just don't think it is broken or particularly needs > an improvement. Actually, this is currently one of the gEDA's > strongest points. It is one of its good points, but try watching the look on a student's face when you explain that to pick up the symbol they just drew / modified, they have to open a text editor and enter some magic string: (component-library "." "Local parts") Then save as "gafrc", which I regurgitate far too often when introducing new users to gEDA. Once we can be sure that there is nothing executable in such a file, it becomes easier to safely write a UI to modify this kind of thing. I'll grant that some gEDA users here won't use it - but then they don't have to. I'm sure it would be possible to write something which makes a good attempt at config write-back for such simple cases, even with executable config files, but a little extra certainty is nice to have. Just a note.. in case it wasn't clear. We aren't proposing the config files will look any different in contents.. just that they will be parsed, rather than executed. -- 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
