🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <346@gaia.UUCP> cook@gaia.UUCP (Forrest Cook) writes:
>My $.02:
>	The SPICE format is nice because it is easy to understand with or
>	without a computer.  The limitation is that there is no position
>	information for parts.
>
>	The Solution: A list of part positions could be included (or a
>	position field for each part) to describe the location of the
>	part on the schematic.  This would allow a person or program
>	to locate the part and then connect the nodes.
>	Or... How about a list of NODE positions?
>	Positions could be given in universal coordinates with 0,0 at
>	the lower left side of the page and 1.0, 1.0 at the upper right
>	side of the page.  This would allow easy translation to pixel
>	oriented devices as well as approximate analog devices such
>	as people.

This is pretty much what I had in mind when I suggested an extended
SPICE format. In specific, I'd like to put all non-spice type
commands in { }'s so a program could easily strip it out.

As for position info, I favor having a small, extensible standard
library. The info you would send would be part position, and orientation.
(Orientation could be done like CIF using direction vectors, and mirrors.)

For instance:

* ASTERISKS INDICATE COMMENTS LINES IN SPICE
*
*	COLLECTOR	BASE		EMITTER
Q1	5		3		6		NPNBJT
{POS: Q1 MX, R(0,1), T(5,37)}

{DEF: NPNBJT
L(1,2),(2,2)
L(2,1),(2,3)
L(3,0),(3,1),(2,2),(3,3),(3,4)
L(3,1.5),(3,1),(2.5,1)}


I think most of this is self evident. M is mirror, R is rotate, and
T is translate. Any comments?

Paul H. Dietz                                        ____          ____
Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering        / oo \        <_<\\\
Carnegie Mellon University                        /|  \/  |\        \\ \\
--------------------------------------------     | | (  ) | |       | ||\\
"If God had meant for penguins to fly,             -->--<--        / / |\\\  /
he would have given them wings."            _________^__^_________/ / / \\\\-