| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On 06/05/14 23:18, Tomasz Wlostowski wrote:
How about about adding a generic attribute set for each part, stored as
a list of type-name-value entries:
(part xxx
(attribute "simulation_model" (string "xxxx.cir") )
(attribute "part_reference_farnell" (int 123456 ) )
)
Such scheme would not only allow adding a vendor P/N to each symbol, but
also simulation models, high speed constraints (length, impedance) and
so on.
Yes, this is a good way to do it, we'd just need to define some grammar of "types" to allow parsing, and everything else is self-describing. It does seem a little verbose, but as Lorenzo said, maybe it's not possible to add unknown elements without breaking everything, and we'd have to go down a road where new elements always say exactly what they are.
I suppose one question is in that case, why wouldn't all elements be self describing, rather than having the "old" elements like "at" having some implicit type, and new elements like "location" (say) needing to say "(location (coords 3.3 3.3))".
Then again, if you ever come across a data type that we didn't have the foresight to include at the start, you'd have to munge it into a string or other primitive to express it, or you're back to square one.
Cheers, John
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
