Re: gEDA-dev: New diagram (attempt at UML)

[Steve Meier <smeier-at-NOSPAMalchemyresearch_dot_com>]

Peter,

For the attributes, the tend to be associated with what is currently an
OBJECT structure (which is the equivelent of your complex). In my
version of OBJECT, I establish two lists for attributes. The first are
attributes which come from a symbol file. The second, are where an
attribute is added at the schematic level, but still attached to an
instance of an OBJECT.

This makes it easy for me to ask an OBJECT do you have schematic level
attribute of "refdes"? what is it's text value? Or do you have a symbol
level attribute of "net" and what is its value?

Pins and Segments (bus or net) can inherit from Line, but a COMPLEX has
to maintain a list of PINs. In my book as does a Net or a Bus. I also
have seperated busrippers as a different class from complex objects.
WHy? well I expect the busripper to have behaviors that I don't expect
from a complex.

Steve Meier


Peter Clifton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a diagram in which I've tried to use UML to improve the clarity
> of the ideas presented before. I'm new to UML, so please shout if it
> looks like I'm using it wrong.
>
> Regards,
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-dev mailing list
> geda-dev@moria.seul.org
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
>   



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