I was just reading http://www.lorentzsolution.com/technology.html and thought I would query whether or not the 'blue sky' intiative would have any side-effects in terms of SPICE modeling and beyond. In the abstraction of the parts layout could it be that there would be a backflow solution to SPICE models? I say backflow because gEDA currently flows from schematic to SPICE and to layout, but not the other way around.
If within the abstraction the channel becomes bidirectional then you might have a kernel type of structure which extends to modelling. I'm not requesting this be implemented, just pondering its future existence. I don't fully understand the concepts so I welcome criticism of my misunderstanding. Mostly I am just perplexed with the challenge that the developers have undertaken. Did curiosity really kill the cat? At least it had a quality life... - Tim On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 15:33 -0800, Steven Michalske wrote: > > > > > On Dec 30, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Edward Hennessy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Regarding component databases: > > > > I'm working on a parts manager for gEDA. Although not completely > > functional yet, the source is located in the git archive. > > > > Sounds great! > > You might want to get input from the folks that use geda for other > flows. > > - Simulation via gnucap and spice > - VLSI design > - The folks with the XML file based components > - uEDA > And I'm sure I'm missing others :-) > > > > _______________________________________________ > geda-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user TimGolden BSEE AB1AH PolySign http://www.BandTechnology.com 1262547065s _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
