Did SPICE development cease around the turn of the century?

And... I have recently suggested to a client that he should buy a LT part to attach to his custom chip... as being cheaper than rolling our own and making an expensive big-ass chip. LT should be happy ;-) ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson
Loading thread data ...

and was

go to

pretty

comes

stopped

Aylward

SuperSpice

suppose

low-level

probes,

packages

focus,

abilities

although

--
>>>>>> especially how it compares to, e.g., PSpice.
>>>>>> ---Joel
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

[snip]

Baloney!

Just add, in the LTspice .CIR file...

.INC "Test_XtalOscillator_Spare_V3.net" (the netlist from PSpice) .LIB "C:\PSpice\DeviceLib\X-Fab\CX06\pspice\DigitalCells\Gates.lib" .LIB "C:\PSpice\DeviceLib\X-Fab\CX06\pspice\Pads\Pads.lib" .LIB "C:\PSpice\DeviceLib\X-Fab\CX06\pspice\cx06a3\CaseTM.lib" .INC "C:\PSpice\DeviceLib\Spacer.txt"

Same libraries as were used by PSpice. LTspice conforms to the spice "standards", so it's trivial.

Though maybe that's an issue for you. Us PROS keep all our models in libraries which can be used in any schematic :-)

I used PCWrite with all the fonting niceties turned off. Plus Aaron wrote me a version logger (automatically creating and numbering back-ups), so I could go back easily... invoked automatically when I ran PSpice.bat.

No "translation" necessary between PSpice and LTspice. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

Us pros do same. But my CAD has libraries different from PSpice. Sometimes pin names are (or have to be) in other languages. But the main thing is, even some of the LTC models are not containing all the pins the chip has. The schematic must.

Yup. But I am not using PSpice. Ok, I have an old Microsim license from the DOS days but haven't used that, it's pretty much all LTSpice now.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

SUBCKT instantiations don't care about naming convention, just pin order. So name pins to your heart's content.

Can't your symbols have a selectable SUBCKT name?

If you can't do that you just haven't let your imagination run wild :-)

Stop by some time and I'll demonstrate my bag of tricks... I have hundreds :-)

The invite applies to _anyone_ having such issues.

Also study what I did in....

formatting link

[snip] ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

And that's one of the issues. Some models have less pins that the real part.

I could hand-edit the schematic.

It always does :-)

But first I want to check out your outdoor kitchen ...

This is a bit tougher for circuit level guys. Schematics can contain lots of parts where LTSpice wouldn't have the foggiest what to do with those. Connectors, canned oscillators, filters, the occasional uC, mechanical parts, chips where the SPICE model has a different (lower) number of pins, and so on.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

Hidden power pins?

I've gotten around that by writing my template such that a connected pin over-rides "phantom" power.

Personally, after lots of hassles like that with a Microchip project, I re-wrote templates so that phantom power isn't allowed... what you see connected is what you get ;-)

Mechanical stuff, I set with no template, so it doesn't appear in the netlist, just on the schematic.

Connectors, pretty much the same, just node labels. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

No, that would be easy. Things like oscillator sync pins. Functions that were left out because they probably weren't deemed important enough for sims.

I tend not to use phantom power either.

That's less easy in the board level world but can be done.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

That's "leech," and they're not grubs, they're full-on adult wormlike things; grubs are usually beetle larvae.

formatting link

Did you know that one way to tell if lakewater is safe to drink is to determine if there are leeches in it? (they won't live in polluted water.) ;-)

Hope This Helps! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

Yes, being the self-appointed chief of the internet spelling, grammar, syntax, and punctuation police is a thankless job; it's somewhat akin to trying to hold back a tsunami with a ping-pong paddle. ;-)

Thanks, Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

Well, maybe they got it right, and decided that that was good enough.

After all, if it works, why fix it?

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

Hmmm. No wonder leaches are rare.

John

Reply to
John - KD5YI

You don't like Cygwin? Or just the ngspice port?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

ike

d

ge...

t

I've used cygnwin in the past and found it to be buggy. It is far easier just to have a linux machine and a windows machine. I haven't tried ngspice under cygwin. I just don't mess with the program.

That said, some of this AMD consumer mobos have iommu capability. [Intel only puts such hardware on server mobos.] When the AMD bulldozer comes out, I'm going to try virtualization.

I get a kick about these mac owners running vmware. You bitch about windows, get a mac, and then pay retail for windows or use some pirated XP. Then they bitch about the performance under vmware. Hey kids, macs aren't built for virtualization. Of course the performance sucks.

Reply to
miso

I use Cygwin on the Windows side of my dual boot Kubuntu / XP laptop, which is my main computer at the moment. It isn't necessarily the best tested Unix clone in existence, but it does provide most of the things I need that Windows doesn't, e.g. a decent X client so that I can run stuff remotely on my home boxes.

I'm pretty much of a command line guy most of the time, and Cygwin fits that style very well.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

Total rubbish. I have exactly two pieces of software that need Windoze, and I run those in XP under Parallels - at full speed mind you - or even faster than native windows in some cases. As a benefit, I don't have to suffer the rest of the Windoze catastrophe. You need enough RAM to dedicate to the VM, but the virtualization is feature of the chipset, it's not something that Apple could design out even if they wished to.

Folk I know routinely have three or four Windows VMs running on a Mac laptop, while developing software that must work in the various broken browsers. You just need enough RAM. No surprises there. The Mac is a much better developers' O/S than anything MS has ever made.

Reply to
Clifford Heath

Well, besides it being a verb, they're not all that rare - a "leach field" is another term for a "drain field," which is used in lieu of a cesspool in sewage systems.

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

'Scuse my butting in. Cygwin is a dog, it tries to do unix-like things on an OS that cannot support some basic unix ideas. So cygwin always fails.

Much easier to run windows + unix (linux, *BSD, whatever you like) on either separate machines, or one in a virtual machine as an option.

I met unix in 1997 and decided to run separate machines, I still use windows desktop, but prefer Linux for serious work. The Linux boxes here usually run headless and are viewed on the desktop box. Works for the stuff I do.

Grant.

Reply to
Grant

Separate machines are easier unless you're a road warrior like me. I usually use Kubuntu, which is what I'm running now, but there are several things I need XP for. The leading ones are PPTP VPNs and programs that don't run well in Wine, dosbox, or dosemu, or that need an X server. Putty is nice too, but I have to keep the window open or the X connection drops.

Any time I'm connecting to a Unix box from Windows, I have to contend with the annoying parts of the file system incompatibilities--the uppercase/lowercase file name issue and forward vs reverse slashes. (The loosey-goosey file system semantics of Linux (especially over NFS) are a problem regardless.)

I don't like virtualization in general, because if I'm running a real copy of Windows in a VM, I still have a lot of the vulnerabilities of real Windows. I also find it a time sink, though it may have got better since the last time I tried it.

If I need to do heavy-duty Unix things, I can reboot to Kubuntu, but meanwhile, with Cygwin, my scripts work and I can run LaTeX and remote X apps easily.

So I don't need Cygwin to be a real OS, just a convenience. Works well that way for me.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.