kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/10/2014 01:34 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:14:22AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
>> That last sentence seems like an oxymoron to me.  Implementing in C++ should always be no
>> more difficult than the design.  The design is where the thinking should happen.
>> Conceptually the design may or may not be easy, but the coding should not be harder than
>> that either way.
> 
> Well, I put design into implementation, then. I meant to say that the
> we would need to know how the netlist read/write code is 'freestanding'
> i.e. if is tied to some eeschema/pcbnew innard or could be easily called
> from cvpcb. Code inspection is needed for that and I was just proposing
> the broad idea.
> 
>> But agreed, the *.cmp file seems like a relic of old school, pre-KIWAY design.
> 
> Kiway or not, it simply redundant information already easily carried by the
> netlist file. And another file format to keep handled and maintained (I
> like the philosophy of "what isn't there can't be broken")
> 
>> In the class PROJECT there is:
>>
>> *A* ) the ability to hang data structures derived from PROJECT::_ELEM.
>>
>> *B* ) the notion of "data on demand".
> 
> I still prefer working with individual applications without a project
> manager in the way (*and* in separate process spaces), thanks :D




Philosophies tend to come and go with changing realities.  And even with the changing of
mere perception of realities.

When the single process solution is so compelling that it does significantly more than
than the detached processes, then maybe you will come around.  If not, no sweat, at least
it will work better for me and a large number of other users.

In general it is difficult to compare that which you have in your hand with something
coming in the future.