Text-based schematics?

There are 2 commercial "solutions", their websites are full of BS bingo probably for VC reasons.

https://www.jitx.com/

Code to Electronics - atopile

And there is a free Python module

https://devbisme.github.io/skidl/

None of those are able to explain the problem they are trying to solve. 

Yes you can but I don’t think the syntax is described anywhere.  Historically there have been a number of workarounds that involved changing the text files.

Is it possible to take an existing file and modify it without using the application and get acceptable results? I've never played in the files, I just recall they were discussed in a KiCAD course I did. It just seemed impossible that the text produced the graphic representation. That blew me a way. 

Every designer has their preferences and their productivity. I always have a pause before a final check prior to sending a design to be manufactured. During that final check I clean up both inefficiencies and weaknesses in the design, even if they won't likely affect performance. Or I might add in more test points or more intuitive labels. I not sure exactly how important all this is in circuit functionality, but I do catch some errors and the results are high productivity with a high chance of the PCB working. Other designers have different methods and performance, but that doesn't mean they would have better (or worse) performance using my methods..

yes, although the structures are intended to support the graphic tools, the workflow and the manufacturing files.

I don't see those getting generated by a text based front end. (in an achievable way)

Doesn't KiCAD have some underlying text base?

dougw said:

I can't resist cleaning up schematics to minimize corners and crossovers, even though it takes time.

It takes self-challenge:
"Am I doing this because I can't sleep if there are cross-overs that can be avoided" or
"Is this diagram clear enough that my colleagues (or me in 7 years) will be able to understand it".

Good Enough is a valid KPI for efficiency improvements.

I think of E-CAD as "word processors" for electronic design and I have my own conventions to make schematics "readable". I can't imagine a text base description language that would be as clear or readable. CAD systems have many tools to minimize the work and show connectivity at a glance and there are a lot of tricks to making the design process quicker and more readable. There are some conventions like making signals flow from left to right and top to bottom, but you are right, to make a schematic into something easily readable takes work. I can't resist cleaning up schematics to minimize corners and crossovers, even though it takes time. I find many techniques used to reduce schematic clutter (such as connections made with labels instead of wires and busses shrunk to a single line) to be confusing and time consuming to decipher, so I only use labels when making connections to a new page. I would actually rather make a bigger page than add more pages.

You are not alone with this.  I too have used block diagrams for the very top level.  Sometimes when I am looking at the higher level hierarchical code developed by another person I will translate it into block form manually on piece of paper as a way to help commit the names of the blocks and signals to memory. 

I find the interconnect in HDLs completely incomprehensible.

So I use a block diagram editor at the top level to hang all the blocks together but I find the HDL much better at describing the logic.

I know that some other people find the opposite.

I certainly can't imagine doing analogue design in text.

I would post an example but I'm supposed to be getting a big design to work right now so no time

MK