Stefan Salewski <[email protected]> writes: > OK, shame on me for missing that option. But I do not think that this > really proves that a gschem rewrite is obsolete.
I may believe that writing a second gschem editor is worse use of your time than improving the existing one, but it is not up to me to judge how you use your time. For your stated purpose, writing this graphical editor seems wrong, but now that it exists, it is interesing to try to put it to good use. It may start as a new netlister with integrated graphical viewer. The viewer may be the best verification that your parser works correctly. > There are so many similar problems, wishful improvements. All big task > currently, no one really does it. Such an improvement should take at > most some hours in Ruby. A really useful result will be a parser with a clean, documented netlisting API, that people can use to write netlisters who do not want to use/learn guile. Maybe I should try to do the same for python :-) > And this example unfortunately shows one weak point of gEDA: The initial > authors and experts have retired, functionality may be already there, > but most of us do not know or understand it. ... documentation, again. -- Stephan _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
