On Wednesday 18 August 2010, John Doty wrote: > Exactly what is the problem you experience?
1. There are many components that do not netlist properly. Every symbol must netlist correctly, no exceptions. There is more to simulation than simple spice circuits. 2. There are others that netlist properly to spice only because of hacks specific to the symbol. It is not acceptable for the netlister to have any knowledge of any specific symbol or any specific parameter, ever. 3. There is no reverse translation. 4. In most cases, the user enters a value string, in whatever syntax the simulator wants, which means it could be different for different simulators. 5. It seems to be necessary to have a different schematic for layout and simulation. 6. Probes are not supported. 7. Nets are collapsed out, even if the simulator doesn't want it that way. 8. I'm tired of hearing about how perfect it is, when I know it isn't. 9. We need to support modern simulators, not just 30 year old antiques like Spice, and we need to support them fully, not just the compatibility subset. 10. geda seems to insist that everyone who wants to play here must adopt its way of doing things, which is in many ways like a proprietary system. We don't outreach to formats that the leaders consider to be standard. 11. That "two stage amplifier" example should be simple enough to explain in a single breath, but it's .. how long???????? I could probably come up with another dozen, but this should be enough. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
