X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:33:14 +0100 (CET)
From: Roland Lutz <rlutz AT hedmen DOT org>
To: "karl AT aspodata DOT se [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Power and IO symbols
In-Reply-To: <20201209065927.985928512091@turkos.aspodata.se>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2012091414150.1205@nimbus>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012090007290 DOT 1129 AT nimbus> <20201209065927 DOT 985928512091 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
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

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, karl AT aspodata DOT se [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> The netif_*.sym ones are useful in a subschematic. The vertical line 
> marks the border/end/interface of a subschematc. Also I like the thicker 
> line for power sym.

Looking at these symbols, I see what you mean: your port symbols are at 
the same time net symbols, so for example, an input called "in1" is 
connected to the net called "in1" in the subschematic.

Seeing how net and port symbols are now identical except for the netname= 
/ portname= attribute, I wonder if it may be a good idea to remove this 
distinction and connect the pin of an instantiating component not to a 
*component*, but to a *net* in the subschematic.

Up until now, when a subschematic component is hooked up to the 
subschematic(s) it instantiated, a pin with pinlabel=in1 on that component 
is connected to a component with portname=in1 (or refdes=in1) inside the 
subschematic.  This would change so it is connected to the net named 
`in1' inside the subschematic.

Pro: The confusion between netname= and portname= is resolved by actually 
making it the same thing.

Con: It may be necessary to implement an opt-in so no inadvertent 
connections are introduced into existing schematics.

Roland