[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnucap-devel] fixes and subcircuits
From: |
al davis |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnucap-devel] fixes and subcircuits |
Date: |
Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:56:10 -0400 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; ) |
On Monday 07 September 2015, Felix Salfelder wrote:
> you are right about e_subckt, the distance between
> SUBCKT_BASE and DEV_SUBCKT is small enough, and i could just
> use the existing base. however, i still need an inheritable
> MODEL_SUBCKT. do you agree? i will prepare another patch..
sort of.
Before the use of the dispatcher, I would have agreed
completely. I considered it, but got distracted to make the
dispatcher system and plugin system.
Now, I think the whole MODEL hierarchy is unnecessary baggage
that should be phased out. It's a remnant of SPICE. The
uninstantiated static element that is cloned substitutes for the
MODEL. The ability to have behavioral models in commons (bm_*)
is another way to deal with different behavior for the same type
(SPICE levels, VHDL multiple architectures for an entity).
So perhaps all uses of MODEL_SUBCKT should become DEV_SUBCKT?