On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:39 PM, r<[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Anthony Shanks<[email protected]> 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) > > Sorry, I should have guessed you don't need this kind of explanation. > Looks like we are coming from similar background. >
No worries, and yeah it sounds like we do. >> 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. > > That would be great but I wouldn't expect such change to occur any > time soon. Even if we prepared a patch it would probably have to be > maintained separately. > > Cheers, > -r. > Don't worry, I'm seriously considering implementing this in spNet. I planned on looking into how difficult this would be tonight and to think about what the best way to implement this would be. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
