X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
        h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
        bh=hKo5Xmqak4wjSnDoCFSPDHsuKKIZTPqio1qjoSHVtRQ=;
        b=Btss06DL9pPGMSy5QwHZeS0LkKHgs2KLJUkh5YrakEdP1kfFvEczyDBqq/9IWmmPci
         noDeV4XGq2QKkMIAgW/1jFXIJP4CFdgdKwNx9zWupiTJ+aWQec5RUKbY+c9ES9A3XIZg
         SnjuGVXmY+tyc0mJsvNLRk1TQ4J94bBbdntMgUAvzrVMBkdqkIRrkDe7WMnLxnqGH4xi
         otHD4azf5f/WTG0fWQRnz5CeyHuKFkzvI8cAVQddtvSq4Tk32eZQddMu+ygtkD3LPitn
         dYPNx7jfvs5r7Aoccly580TitR8hItqo43nNjJ/IDisFQ8LNU4SU4wvELyVi8lnXDUID
         ujxg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
        bh=hKo5Xmqak4wjSnDoCFSPDHsuKKIZTPqio1qjoSHVtRQ=;
        b=RrZT7oiKxhqlhyZup3zudze1A0n+AAEref1jK8zeBjpa4eUf8S8iEvbYl9CqkToMXo
         pQgOCzqyasLM+0IA/AxiF0YEgGf77E2DOZ+hEbAofOWMfVGIUN8CVl7mP2ifa2Hur9rI
         YycxN0vCtVQ8AOM4PCCCHep45Eb66sxeI+KYMc1bEvcqZ/ApyrdwtWtl3r/CV6/om8RE
         BAx9SFgeu3p2pLXsg65Y7WWnaEqCo88EWe71s7nX8D1VGizkzvb3FZfYYZ9AjKiM2sd+
         ipry8GFUmN6at71vJm330Uv4LEwt/K2eyQ/pSdQoEZHAB9lQecXeCio+IR28e2NmqZhX
         +7cA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111icyIHznQjHLmpdCXXfHU0FeZQcM/1sxe+fE9L9M8WNzgfS4OD
	KFiprCCWBG5PFTSCfsxGkpRtdhLRXg==
X-Received: by 10.98.133.16 with SMTP id u16mr25151261pfd.140.1499331860455;
 Thu, 06 Jul 2017 02:04:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 12:04:19 +0300
Message-ID: <CAMvDHVCoOGz0JZ8KgAkzdzZJe6F1Q+eV--obH8QURAfNveGQCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [geda-user] Refdes= mangling
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Hi, fellow gEDA users,

I'm working on gnetlist refactoring in Lepton, trying to overpower its
inherent issues. I have added some new tests revealing some of them.
While pull request #139 at lepton issue tracker page [1] solves
several of them (which I have still to document), there are others
getting in my way. The PR is rewriting of gnetlist in Scheme (no C
code anymore), the rewritten program is called `lepton-netlist', you
can try it and report if ;-) / how it works on your system.

Now, one of my ideas is to move mangling of hierarchy related
attributes to the post-processing stage in order to process schematic
pages and subpages separately, creating isolated subcircuits first.

After some time of thinking, I realise the use cases when net= is
mangled or not. The former case is for subcircuits that share their
power sources, the latter is for such cases where such power sources
are would-be-isolated within the subschematics.

Are there use cases where it is OK to use refdes= without mangling in
flattened hierarchical schematic netlist? I see only a field for
various potential conflicts...

Thank you,
  Vladimir

[1] https://github.com/lepton-eda/lepton-eda/pull/139