Anthony Shanks wrote: > Yes I know exactly what you mean now and I have seen (and have used) > that kind of hierarchy control present in very high end tools (like > cadence) but it is usually at the schematic capture level like you > stated rather at the netlister level. gschem would have to drastically > change to support that level of hierarchical maniuplation. >
Not in the makefile approach. Define suitable attributes, process with a script, use the results to build the netlist from the pieces. Use the toolkit, don't fight it. > Theoretically I can add some netlisting directive object at the top > level schematic/testbench to handle this in spNet, but I'd have to > look into how much work that would take. It would definately be a > great feature though I agree with you. > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:06 PM, r<[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Anthony Shanks<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> - hierarchy configuration from top-level schematic, >>>> >>> What do you mean by this? >>> >> Say, you want to modify a subcircuit somewhere deep down the hierarchy >> or use an extracted netlist for some of sub-blocks. If there is no >> hierarchy configuration, you would have to modify all cells in the >> design starting from the swapped one up to the top level. With >> hierarchy configuration, you can specify that the sub-cell should be >> mapped to a particular "cell view/architecture" (e.g. "extracted" or >> "schematic_for_openloop_gain_simulation"). >> >> If this could be integrated with gschem, so that it knew which >> schematic it should descend to, that would be perfect. Unfortunately, >> AFAIK gschem has neither the notion of "cell view" nor the hierarchy >> configuration. >> >> One idea would be to add a text-like "component" on the top level >> schematic, say "hierarchyConfiguration", where the user could write >> something like this: >> >> ----- >> # original_file_name file_name_to_be_used >> preamp.sch preamp_for_openloop_sim.sch >> analoglatch.sch analoglatch_extracted.sp >> # path_to_instance file_name >> /X5/X1/something something_else.sch >> ----- >> >> IMHO, having this information present and displayed on the top level >> schematic (testbench) is very convenient from the design management >> point of view. If it was to be added in a GUI or in makefile the >> information would have to be stored and handled separately. >> >> Regards, >> -r. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> geda-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > geda-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user > > > -- 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
