X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=qZfY3tbvFr5Qs0ayPRLfheXsH+sewa0ji7Fqn6KH7/A=;
	b=VS4JOq0DKCs4lHdg5hczt7K7O7imzyXa++/fTgdFULQCPxB6xkDZhgbdfuaZSqre2j
	orsgDxpalUar1iSYCU22kLntlfllHV1cHS93siKhInJea5EXdtdukMzxLbYKvH0NOsVq
	LONQkro+mL7eR0VwUqNZOLOlLyMrf+dH5UXVuBIFtDYNZDYiOkX0IAf+FZIig67d2GOg
	WJjkQ65QmrKQ7xwA5+gmhK+Kx00xR5YTLlR7Im7K2T8Qsn80YVnLgW+ZKThZade2tByT
	pX1k2cMiAc05ZwZya+CXSEHIgB/vD4Nf9vKm5InYiorw3dmaE9Lnx0mt+c2Qtmxi1gMk
	DNiQ==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.180.19.69 with SMTP id c5mr7552158wie.7.1394633466363; Wed,
	12 Mar 2014 07:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<5320667A.6050402@buffalo.edu>
References:	<CALSZ9gpUxtTiN16u6SypxwCZWQZGOGeE77peF0YnKs7FrOkpBw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<5320667A DOT 6050402 AT buffalo DOT edu>
Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:41:05 +0530
Message-ID:	<CALT8Ef686r+PJsUyZkU-uK535=2dGgmuaM1ixCgP739PCJ-sYg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Declare a pin as GND in symbol
From:	Shashank Chintalagiri <shashank DOT chintalagiri AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT 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

--bcaec53d5a8b5ac4b204f469681f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

As an aside, and building on what Steve said, having the nets precisely
named can occasionally (or, for me, almost always) be a problem. The pad
will subsequently always connect to GND, and not PGND or AGND or what have
you. In order to switch later, you need to change the attribute which is
then hidden in a printout of the schematic or can prove just as messy, if
not more, as simply having an extra pin. The problem tends to be more
pronounced when all the supply pins are hidden, because then if you're
feeling lazy during the schematic capture, you realize the problem late
into routing and don't always immediately realize what is wrong.

One possible option, though with its own troubles, is that pins in the
footprint with the same name are always connected. The reason its
problematic is that footprints then start becoming part dependent, which is
probably even harder to track except maybe for very exotic parts.

--bcaec53d5a8b5ac4b204f469681f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">As an aside, and building on what Steve said, having the net=
s precisely named can occasionally (or, for me, almost always) be a problem=
. The pad will subsequently always connect to GND, and not PGND or AGND or =
what have you. In order to switch later, you need to change the attribute w=
hich is then hidden in a printout of the schematic or can prove just as mes=
sy, if not more, as simply having an extra pin. The problem tends to be mor=
e pronounced when all the supply pins are hidden, because then if you&#39;r=
e feeling lazy during the schematic capture, you realize the problem late i=
nto routing and don&#39;t always immediately realize what is wrong. </p>

<p dir=3D"ltr">One possible option, though with its own troubles, is that p=
ins in the footprint with the same name are always connected. The reason it=
s problematic is that footprints then start becoming part dependent, which =
is probably even harder to track except maybe for very exotic parts.</p>


--bcaec53d5a8b5ac4b204f469681f--

- Raw text -