X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 23:06:04 +0100 From: Jan Kasprzak To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Gschem nets without explicit connections Message-ID: <20131229220603.GC27189@fi.muni.cz> References: <20131229205407 DOT GA27189 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <20131229212536 DOT GB27189 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-Muni-Spam-TestIP: 147.251.48.3 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.7 (tirith.ics.muni.cz [147.251.4.35]); Sun, 29 Dec 2013 23:06:05 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.8 at tirith.ics.muni.cz X-Virus-Status: Clean Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk Shashank Chintalagiri wrote: : You can do what you want by simply drawing a short net out from the pins : you want to connect. Be sure to edit the attribute of the net, : specifically put in a meaningful netname. This works, thanks! : Do the same for wherever you want : to connect it to. As long as the netnames match, they will be treated as : the same net. Make the attribute visible for it to show up visibly and in : printouts etc. : : Personally, I find this tends to make pretty but fundamentally unreadable : schematics. I would suggest you look at the symbols in the Input/Output : section of the standard library for what to do when you need to connect : across sheets. This does, of course, work within a sheet as well but : overuse can lead to unreadable schematics. It's basically slightly prettier : way to do what renaming the net does. : : If all your source and destination pins are grouped, such as in a parallel : bus or any other meaningful grouping of signals, I would encourage you to : explore using buses instead of nets. Thanks for the suggestion. I wanted to use it for a situation where I have a complex interconnected group of components (e.g. a step-down converter), which is connected to the MCU by one or two wires - I don't want to clutter the schematics by these inter-group connections. (see http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/bike-lights/#schematics for what I mean by cluttered schematics: having the PWM outputs on the other side of MCU than the step-down converter PWM input leads to long and unreadable nets). Of course, when overused, using labels instead of lines can also lead to unreadable schematics. -Yenya -- | Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak | | New GPG 4096R/A45477D5 - see http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/pgp-rollover.txt | | http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/ Journal: http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/blog/ | Please don't top post and in particular don't attach entire digests to your mail or we'll all soon be using bittorrent to read the list. --Alan Cox