>> Yes, the "label" is so that if you have a dozen subcircuits, you can
>> tell which type each one is. It's _not_ for labelling a specific
>> instance. (E.g., if you insert a register, you can't label it with a
>> register name. You can only label it with the kind of register it is.)
> 
> Right, but sometimes it would be nice to have a label that identifies 
> the particular instance. At least, that's what I would expect when 
> clicking on the item.

I won't disagree with that... ;-)

>> All I know is that I seem to spend more time trying to figure out how to
>> move a component slightly to the side to make more space than actually,
>> you know, designing my stuff! >_<
> 
> Yeah, Routing can be a pain when moving components. You can turn on an 
> experimental feature where it allows you to sort of autoroute the wires 
> in some cases when moving a component, but I've found if you move too 
> far it will make bad connections. The algorithm that autoroutes needs to 
> be a bit smarter, but I think it may be an instance of the halting problem.

The Halting Problem is unsolvable. I doubt wire routine is unsolvable. 
Finding the "perfect" wire routine sounds a bit like the Travelling 
Salesman problem, which is NP-Complete, not *not* unsolvable. And a 
routing algorithm which doesn't alter topology and gives "reasonable" 
results ought to be quite possible, though possibly not easy...

>>> this one was pretty, but was a pain to work with:
>>> http://www.logiccircuit.org/
>>
>> What's up with it?
> 
> Not a clue... all the pretty ones aren't all that bright. ;)

I tried it on Friday. Jesus, it sucks so hard! Eats RAM like candy, 
locks up for minutes at a time for no apparent reason, and doesn't even 
look particularly good anyway. Basically there's nothing to recommend 
it. (Plus I had to wait 30 minutes for the .Net framework to install...)

>>> http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
>>
>> I didn't even know that thing had logic gates...
> 
> It does. While it makes a great general circuit simulator, for anything 
> non-trival its far from ideal for logic simulation, though.

Yeah, it's designed to show you examples, not for serious design work.

>>> The hex editor when I get finished with it will be very nice, though.
>>
>> No it won't. You'll never finish it. >:-)
> 
> Now I'll finish it just to prove you wrong, so ... Nyah!

Heh. I'd like to see that. ;-)

Post a reply to this message