Re: Summer of code: Gschem analysis for parsing

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.