Hej David!
> Unfortunately LEF is anything else than elegant.
> That's why we wanna switch to ALF.
> The grammar has grown historically over the year and Cadence defined
> LEF/DEF
> on a need-to-have basis and everyone uses it because there is nothing
> better.
> I unfortunately can't give any additional input on the topic of
> parsing LEF
> files other than there is a reason that my original grammar looked as
> ugly as
> it did.
I agree, but doesn't mean, that we should drop support for LEFDEF, since
there is already a lot of infrastructure for it, and since ALF is some
kind of a LEFDEF superset, working on the subset contributes for both
standards, so seems like almost free lunch for me :)
> If you wanna have something elegant maybe really focus on ALF, so that
> we can
> provide our IP libs in that format instead.
And since there are as much as zero ALF examples, we have to generate
them ourself, and for me it sounds the best to convert them from the
tones of LEFDEF out there...
Another question. For the datastructures I would have boost geometry on
my radar for all the polygon and rect stuff, since its the only lib I
have experience with and I dont want to write myself all the polygon90
and geometry stuff. Any opinion about using boost geometry, alternative
canidates for that or other geometry related stuff already used in the
QTflow repo which I maybe don't know about :?
Cheers!
Paul