Hi, I have a question. Looking in the literature I realized that apart from Glayout there is another two tools that are impressive which are MAGIC and ALIGN. I would like to know what differentiates GLayout from those, since they are really advanced. Thanks is just for curiosity since you are working so hard on this one

Might help in understanding https://github.com/rahulearn2019/msvsdpim

I don't see Glayout here I don't understand what are you trying to say sorry

Sorry I wasn't clear. This is for tutorial Magic and Align. Glayout is a family of tools where it uses Gdsfactory for layout (with python as compared to TCL in magic) , magic for extraction and DRC and Nethen for LVS, all hidden behind nice utility functions and pdf agonistic mappedpdk class. Guess others can chime in. Thats more or less all I know. Glayout definitely could use better documentation

I have the same question. ALIGN has an automatic routing feature which I don't think Glayout has.

This is somewhat "comparing apples and oranges". Glayout was original created for photonics work, but since it generates valid GDS output, it has been used more generally for GDS generation. Klayout can work with glayout but it has its own routines for scripted GDS generation, as well. Magic is more like klayout; it is a full-featured layout editor, and since (like klayout) it operates in an interpreter environment (Tcl, as mentioned above), it can also generate GDS from interpreter scripts; however, magic has its own database format and so unlike glayout and klayout, it doesn't generate GDS directly, but the scripts generate geometry in the magic database, and then magic can export that to GDS. ALIGN was developed especially for general-purpose analog automatic placement and routing, which involves a lot more than just scripting; it is a very complicated set of optimization problems.

Hi Tim, thanks for the answer, I can see how MAGIC is out of the equation, and I undeserstand the initial purpose of Glayout, but since ALIGN seems to work so well with analog automatic place and route which is the aim following the same path that something that has already been developed in the Open Source community? For sure I am missing a lot of things that's why I want to understand them. Thanks

There have been a number of attempts to do automated analog layout, taking different approaches, trying different things. The leading development efforts are FaSOC, ALIGN, and BAG, and a few others.

And which would be the main difference of FaSOC for analog design compared to the others? Maybe is not the analog itself but the whole implementation...? @Tim Edwards

Don't judge a tool by what is claimed in a companion paper. All these automation tools tend to look fantastic until you try them. There is a direct relationship between how powerful they claim to be and how long it will take you to figure out how to use them. Glayout is meant to be relatively simple, but easy to use.