[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: gEDA: possible change, feedback desired
- To: geda-dev@seul.org, hamish@debian.org
- Subject: Re: gEDA: possible change, feedback desired
- From: Magnus Danielson <cfmd@swipnet.se>
- Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 01:38:58 +0200
- Delivery-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 19:15:22 -0400
- In-Reply-To: <20010727203157.A22947@silly.cloud.net.au>
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107261234020.3357-100000@localhost><200107262153.f6QLrM930395@icarus.com><20010727203157.A22947@silly.cloud.net.au>
- Reply-To: geda-dev@seul.org
- Sender: owner-geda-dev@seul.org
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org>
Subject: Re: gEDA: possible change, feedback desired
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 20:31:57 +1000
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 02:53:22PM -0700, Stephen Williams wrote:
> > but I would like to point out that I decided to stick with XNF and
> > not use EDIF for Xilinx support because all that insidious punctuation
> > led to output files 10 times larger then the equivilent XNF, and
> > much harder to read.
>
> But XNF has no hierarchy, right? I wouldn't want a flat netlist, so
> the alternative is lots of XNF files. Not so nice.
After synthesis you are flat anyway. There is no point in hierarchy
then, at least it is not very big as far as todays routines go. Before
synthesis is another mater.
> Besides, the brackets make things fun when you have to edit
> EDIF files by hand ;-)
You are evil!
Cheers,
Magnus