Re: [Qucs/gnucsator] Assertion failed (#9)

[Felix Salfelder]

On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 12:06:34AM -0400, al davis wrote:
> Clearly something is wrong.  Probably there is more than one problem.
> 
> If you get warnings you do not understand, you cannot trust the results.

Absolutely. Let me give some more background. Gnucsator is a
work-in-progress. In Gnucsator, everything is user defined and
configurable. There is some translation in place to make sense of
component instances and parameter names that are used in Qucs.

This is what Dow is trying to to: build a circuit for Qucsator, and then
run it with gnucsator. I have implemented some support for this, but I
normally do it the other way round.

Paste this into lumped.v, and you will get a better resistor but without
the temperature dependency.

module R(p, n);
  parameter R
  parameter Temp
  parameter Tc1
  parameter Tc2
  parameter Tnom

  resistor #(.r(R)) dev(p, n);
endmodule // R

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 22:54:07 +0000
> > open circuit: internal node 5
> > open circuit: internal node 3
> > (+ many more warnings like this)

The bjt wrapper in qucsator looks like this

"""
parameter npn=1
parameter pnp=-1

module BJT(b, c, e, s);
  parameter Area;
  parameter Type;
  parameter Temp;
  [..]

  paramset mynpn npn;
  [..]
  endparamset

  paramset mypnp pnp;
  [..]
  endparamset

  mynpn #(.area(Area*(1.+Type)*.5+1e-20) .temp(Temp)) p(c, b, e, s);
  mypnp #(.area(Area*(1.-Type)*.5+1e-20) .temp(Temp)) p(c, b, e, s); // **
endmodule
"""

> There is a floating subcircuit?

With the wrapper above, you always have a dummy instance with zero area.
This may be where the floating internal nodes come from. At least they
go away when you comment out the pnp **. As indicated in the other mail,
we need a better wrapper...

thanks
felix