Re: gEDA-dev: Last call for input on SOW for Linux Fund....

[al davis <ad151-at-NOSPAMfreeelectron_dot_net>]

On Monday 01 December 2008, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> Anyway, I'd prefer the unix mode: Separate tools for separate
> tasks.

This is the unix mode.  Separate tools for separate tasks.

It is common in commercial tools to do schematic to layout in 
two hops.  The first is schematic to netlist.  The second is 
netlist to layout.

All I'm suggesting is using a netlist format, and augmenting it 
with info relevant to schematic and layout, while keeping it 
strictly as a netlist format, so you can do a round trip.


On Monday 01 December 2008, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> But the devils lurk in the details.

Abstracting layout and schematic info so it fits within the 
context and spirit of a netlist format.

Some commercial tools already use formats that are essentially 
netlist formats, augmented in some way but still fundamentally 
netlist format.

Our status now is that only a few paths really work.  Probably 
the path that works best is gschem to pcb, but there is no back 
path.  Some other paths work one way if you accept that you may 
need to hack things a little.




_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev