delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-Authority-Analysis: | v=2.0 cv=NLdXCjGg c=1 sm=0 a=6jktZp3dcHAl1vye2O6wCg==:17 a=jl9P3j1e7_0A:10 a=yvSPhu-8laEA:10 a=OYqO19DY7_YA:10 a=6WB07kdHjWAA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=wR-FlJDvAAAA:8 a=2HzVpNkvsiYA:10 a=zzVsEzu1IhDrd65l_I4A:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=6jktZp3dcHAl1vye2O6wCg==:117 |
X-Cloudmark-Score: | 0 |
X-Originating-IP: | 70.113.67.117 |
Message-ID: | <5092B62E.3010901@ecosensory.com> |
Date: | Thu, 01 Nov 2012 12:49:34 -0500 |
From: | John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.9) Gecko/20121015 Icedove/10.0.9 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: [geda-user] More pins, one net (was gaf improvement - moving |
of components) | |
References: | <HwV.JnH4.36n{7zfGcAr DOT 1GacLE AT seznam DOT cz> <CAM2RGhQy=RD0CUmvo7e9Cns52EddN3OFVSzEiUEHw+rh9rFWtQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20121101155724 DOT GC32696 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> |
In-Reply-To: | <20121101155724.GC32696@fi.muni.cz> |
Reply-To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
On 11/01/2012 10:57 AM, Jan Kasprzak wrote: > Evan Foss wrote: > : That issue is just an artifact of how you are drawing things. If you > : redraw that schematic with a short length of vertical net going from > : the horizontal one to each pin it will behave as you want when the > : parts are moved. I always have the pin terminate the end of net line > : to avoid this. I also do that because I visually dislike doing it the > : other way. > > I think this is one of the problems of gschem It would be nice to not have to worry with this artifact. If component terminals could touch along a wire without needing a stub of their "own" and be dragged, it would be a speed up, as in "computer aided", as in ECAD or CAE.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |