Re: [Qucs-help] Support for Indices in Texts

[Clifford W. <cli...@cl...>]

Hi,

first of all a little patch to the patch. It should read

    if (txt.isNull()) {

of course..  ;-)

On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:55:58AM +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> Le jeudi 3 janvier 2008, Clifford Wolf a ?crit?:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I've added support for indices in text fields (see attached patch). I
> > wanted to ask if the syntax (Name||Index) is ok for you guys before I start
> > adding the Feature to other code paths.
> 
> I will prefer a tex like syntax. Sorry but || is ugly :-(

The problem is: the way my patch is working you cant add a text lable like

	U_1 = R_1 * I_1

because the Label has just one index part at the end. So my plan was to
use the || syntax in graphictext.cpp and _ for the cases where a single
identifier is used.

> BTW I have some code that will allow to use directly latex notation (not latex 
> but eps generated form latex) in qt using gs. If you want I can send you this 
> program.

yes please. In fact I don't care what the schematics in qucs look like - I
just need nice looking pngs. if you have something to create .tex i can use
tex and dvipng to generate the pngs I need...

> > Actually I'm not sure whether seperating name and Index using the last
> > underscore in the text wouldn't be a better idea..
> >
> > Also I'm not sure in which places a support for indices would make sense.
> > I in fact only need it in the text labels and component attributes
> > displayed in the schematic to make the schematic look better. Especially
> > when using this for sweeped parameters, etc. would would be better to stay
> > within the nameing conventions for variables and thus use the underscore.
> > But I'm not sure whether this would break anything or would confuse users
> > because then a variable would be displayed using the index in one place and
> > using the underscore in another..
> 
> > what do you think?
> 
> I think that we must use latex in qucs. For now we can use your patch but 
> please be compatible with latex syntax, do not try to invent a new one

But Latex syntax would only be one charater. So I would also need to add a
parser for { .. } to allow grouping of multiple characters which in turn
would need more escape sequences and so forth..

..that's to much effort for me for the problem I'd like to solve atm.  ;-)

In fact a (command-line) converter for creating .tex code from .sch files
would be the perfect solution imo.

I'd really love to see the code you mentioned above..

yours,
 - clifford

-- 
for(var d,i=<>just</>,j=function(){d~=i~(defined(i=next[*],i)?" ":"
");},just,another,SPL,hacker;defined i||({debug d;return 0;});j());