<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cool. thanks for the links. I've already looked around quite a bit, > and am very hesitant to just write more shit on top of other shit.
All software suck. If you think that yours will not then: a) you are a narcissist b) you are the only user c) all of the above > The > idea behind this is it's completely mine. So yes, I have a tendency to > want to reinvent a few wheels, but I think it'll give me greater > satisfaction. *I* think you bite off way too much and will waste two years and never get anything usable done. > The problem with geda, etc., is that it's taking the > unix approach -- a buncha little command line tools that somehow make a > "system", using text files as communication medium. That is because this approach actually works, it is proven in serious work, it can be tested without writing a test application of about the same complexity as the real job and it deals neatly with the users needs for automation without forcing the application to contain thick, bloated object management code for the users extensions. > I hate that, > largely because it allows the infectious spread of little files all > over your system, encourages people to write scripts from outside the > system that probably won't work for you, and exposes the user > unnecessarily to the implementation of where you keep files, > directories, blabla. Wrong on many levels: The idiot users will get into trouble no matter what you do; while the user that is smart enough to write an extension will need to deal with the implementation anyway. You, the developer, has to decide on wheather it is smarter to write your very own object manager, API's and the user/developer documentation thereoff or leave it to the operating system by simply using what is already there. > I'm more of the windows approach, where you have > one integrated environment, and any text you type is from within the > application itself, and most application-related data is hidden from > the user unless he *really* wants to get at it. I.M.O. The reason for the "integrated" windows approach is simply because that OS lacked/lacks efficient tasks, interproces communication and it does not support scripting. So each developer will end up rolling his own monolith and because all the code monkeys see this, it becomes "the way". > (disclosure: I've > never actually installed geda, but I tried icarus once and couldn't get > it to compile -- another bane of open source stuff I can't stand. The odds are great that the problem is to be found in front of the screen rather than the code. > I'm > not a CS person, so when I download something, I just want it to work, > and I don't get off trying to *make* it work...). Another reason for > doing this on my own is that I'd like a general-purpose CAD/design > framework, of which electrical/IC design is only one part. Also, I > think geda simulations are spice-based, which is batch, And this matters ... in what way exactly?? > which is sooo > your-father's buick, which I hate as much as text files... aaand > another thing is I'm very big on user-experience. "Experience" over "Functionality". I see - well, it worked for Bill. The "knowledge workers" forced to use the pretty etch-a-schetch tools are less than happy and will seek to minimise the pain by avoiding most of the alledged functionality. Last time I felt "the pain of the little used feature" was setting headers and footers in Excel - No, it does NOT work the same as in Word ("work" is perhaps a strong word). > I'd like my program > to *look* slick, like it belongs in a movie or something. I think that > means starting from scratch, since I've not seen any CAD program take > any artistic/human/psychological approach to its design. That *is* true - the problem with CAD programs are that they need the *exact* details to be entered at design time so one cannot easily schetch in them and fix the design errors later. But it does not follow that there is a need for rewriting the rendering engine or the design rules checker - you could actually achieve something by writing a tool that allow an existing CAD system to support the way designers actually work so that they use the tool up front instead of as it is now where CAD is the digitiser for a paper-based design. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list