X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Status:	Clean
X-Virus-Scanned:	clamav-milter 0.98.4 at av02.lsn.net
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] ideas on slotting and mechanisms for
	grouping/associating heterogenous symbols.
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<CAM2RGhS4L-ch6FEcLtdSt0vA0BdQZvq+AuFDP+9ea7Ftd=AALg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<8444F816-17CE-4A56-A982-4A60DEDA72B8 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1512300544550 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<87FC7D4C-157A-499E-8B93-97653D6A7C68 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1601012231450 DOT 1728 AT newt>
	<AE52C1DB-01A3-43FA-AE8E-68AD33F37180 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<624E6A69-62CE-4FCB-9D44-9FDF036254A3 AT sbcglobal DOT net>
	<56880043 DOT 7040003 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<20160102182739 DOT 5d195829880cf75768ae0a82 AT gmail DOT com>
	<201601021755 DOT u02HtOWs020325 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<20160102191018 DOT 5e68c0c4ecc70a49bd9998f6 AT gmail DOT com>
From:	John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com>
Message-ID:	<56881642.9060405@ecosensory.com>
Date:	Sat, 2 Jan 2016 12:26:10 -0600
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Icedove/38.4.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20160102191018.5e68c0c4ecc70a49bd9998f6@gmail.com>
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

On 01/02/2016 12:10 PM, Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> That's a collision. Ideally all symbols ending up in the same footprint should have the same refdes.

Don't understand that sentence.  Is it about slotting on the same IC package?

If gate swaps were done between repeated identical hierarchic layout sections the result would be like a barrel shift.
The effect would ripple.

The idea would be useful if  swaps were done between repeated identical hierarchic layout sections and nearby glue logic with the
same parts.

I was thinking symbol names as top level of swappable pins, where a symbol is for a schematic section, not
a package.  I think keeping classic slotting as a separate mechanism from pin swapping would be best for usability
and understanding, (especially since few will be interested in classic slotting with dual and quad packages -- they'll just use 
programmable glue logic chips, where the number of pins involved is better called pin swapping).

- Raw text -