On Tuesday 22 May 2012, [email protected] wrote: > > In gschem, it has been considered normal to use a different > > schematic for layout or simulation, and maybe even > > different for different simulators. There really should > > be types for attributes, some attributes are for > > simulation, some for layout, etc. Mark them some way, > > perhaps with a prefix character like "." or "_". Or .. > > just pass them on and make the target ignore any > > parameters it doesn't like? > > OK. So, parameters not required for simulation need to be > marked and ignored when parsing.
Ultimately you really need to pass them on so they can be passed back. That means that the models need a way to deal with parameters that are merely being passed through. But for now, don't worry about it. One thing at a time. > > One nuisance point I just realized ...... A gschem sch > > file has no notion of connectivity. It comes from the > > extraction. To do it correctly, you need the actual > > symbols. That's bad, but we need to deal with it. > > Yes, one suggestion is to parse the standard library of > symbols initially at the time of compilation and save > required information in an easily (fast) accessible format > (array?). The required information may the position of pins > and some attributes like graphical etc. That doesn't work because the symbols can be changed at any time. The compiled code can know nothing about specific symbols. _______________________________________________ Gnucap-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucap-devel
