Re: [SI-LIST] : Schematic entry for HSPICE

S. Weir ([email protected])
Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:42:58 -0700

With regard to VL and version control for libraries, it really does not
exist. The library scheme used by VL is very simplistic. If you update a
library component, and wish to retain active history of the old part your
only choice is to make a new part with a new identification, sic filename.
They also have an even more primitive method of cementing over the entire
design and library database with an archive operation. To ease the pain of
global replacements they do have a rudimentary and painfully slow database
interface called DxDatabook which can be used to effect global search and
replace. However, that utility will probably require that you hire a
consulting outfit to set-up, such as CAST/LINEAGE back East. We are not
favorably impressed by VL's QA at all, but it is much cheaper than Cadence.

At 06:48 AM 8/23/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>For the past year or two, we've been using ViewLogic's Spice
>Integration set of tools (ViewDraw, SpiceLink, ViewTrace, etc.)
>to perform the same task.
>For the most part, it works well. It has an simple and easy to
>learn interface, the schematic entry is straight forward, can
>directly write hspice-compatable decks, and allows for custom
>libraries. The one point I'm not certain on is "versions management."
>Overall, it has its pros (ease of use, cross-platform compatability,
>etc.) and cons (customization is difficult/limited, I personally
>don't like their standard libraries, plotting, etc.) like any
>other tool, but I believe it's worked well for our purposes as
>a GUI front end to Hspice. Again, we utilize our own form
>of "versions management" outside the tool, so I cannot comment
>on that aspect of it.
>If you have access to it or have the budget for it, we also use
>both Cadence's and Mentor's set of IC design tools as front
>ends. They work as well (in fact, our folks like them better),
>but they have a well defined cost ($$$) associated with them.
>In particular, the Cadence front end has a built-in waveform
>viewer that's quite nice and several integrated test point options
>that work well.
>If cost is not an issue, I'd suggest the Cadence
>IC tools route (of the three we use around here). If cost
>is an issue, I'd suggest ViewLogic's tool suite.
>> Hello SI-list members,
>> setting up and handling of signal integrity simulations above
>> a certain netlist complexity by manually writing HSPICE decks
>> is error-prone from our experience.
>> It seems to be a safer, a more descriptive and more effective way
>> to deal with schematic views.
>> So I am looking for a tool or set of tools which
>> * is suitable for the needs of signal integrity simulations
>> * has a schematic entry
>> * can write HSPICE netlists
>> * has model library management and design versions management
>> capabilities
>> Any recommendations, advices or comments?
>> What is your experience concerning this topic?
>> Thanks,
>> Michael
>**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
>[email protected] In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
>si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at
> ****

**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to [email protected] In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at ****