Re: Wanted: LM-709 (Spice model) National Op-Amp

Paul,

> I do agree if there is no sanctioning body like IEEE or
> W3C or anybody to validate the claim for an improved
> engine, one has to be more critical. How can one judge
> the advance of proprietary standards unless you guys
> start opening up your code so the community can see the
> difference in the source? Sorry if you feel I am posting
> garbage, I am trying to be positive.

Well, I'm not trying to be negative you do post garbage.
You can't evaluate a simulator's performance by looking at
the source code and you should know better. I don't know
if you're deliberately dishonest or ignorant. LTspice is
close to a half million lines of code. You have to compile
it and test the program to see its performance. I'm guessing
your comment is more dishonest than ignorant because it
appears to be an empty challenge to release the source code
of LTspice and trying to couple that challenge with a
challenge of proof of LTspice's performance, presumably
hoping one topic will drop with the other.

But it's not very hard to understand why LTspice runs faster
and is more accurate then other/earlier SPICE engines. I
occasionally give 4hr seminars that explain in some detail
what one needs to do to make a better SPICE engine. People
are surprised that I reveal all, but the trick is I tell what
one needs to do, not how to go about writing that code. There
is an arraingment with an officer of LTC that prevents loss
of any of the planet's intellectual property in the event of
my death so that how to implement this code is not lost when
I die. Anyway, in the seminar, I demonstrate the
fantastically improved accuracy of the core LTspice solvers
and the corresponding improvements in simulation speed with
live simulation runs. Anyway those with legitimate interest
in LTspice can contact your local LTC office and request
when/where the next seminars will be(please don't contact me,
I have people smarter than me that schedule them). The
seminars are worldwide.

--Mike


.