Re: [Gnucap-devel] missing info in the models tarballs.

[al davis]

On Monday 26 February 2007 10:26, nbs_r wrote:
> Still, the most reliable option would be to ship gnucap with
> a model interpreter/vm or at least an embedded compiler.
> Sites without or with incomplete development tools are not
> that uncommon.

Of course, but can you imagine how much work that is?

It must be a compiler because of speed.  Model evaluation is the 
biggest factor in run time on large circuits.  Gnucap pays a 
lot of attention to minimizing the number of model evaluations.

The so-called "fast spice" simulators take several approaches to 
making them faster.  Gnucap is one of the first.  It can be the 
fastest if you are willing to lose accuracy.  Just using 
simpler models will go a long way.

To keep the speed, and actually get something done, I decided 
that the best approach is to use an external compiler.

If you don't have a compiler, gnucap will still run, but with 
limited behavioral modeling capability.  Anything Spice can do, 
gnucap will do without the compiler.


Nosy question that nobody will answer:  How many of the 
commercial proprietary simulators use gcc under the hood?