X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=qNXdUNO/TJizRpHr1GjF2OXet26+Of7soMDrelbXz2o=;
	b=xc9oJxu8h7s9D5k/NLI8ZxzKWHcPg9EW8gv/L/OBqV84VCOrLdiV0zU9eMr49rHWYr
	pVzTXRhVw889nQZtEqoW+Ti89J9L2KP9CgWOy7cKeNbblx2owJj6QT4doDqQJDUc+qbl
	JHJLLl1k6DtJrfzqjtElbocZVX/0a/JLyw3cp5j17bNI1KwW0EvWzR4lzMsH9KZ54AH3
	X0ojo23icLcdRwF4TTzMN1FJxgWw2Jqy/h7QXlx4pROfFQUgG7YHhIQXQR2kgh9pmoha
	qWZUy1vHXYv9j7z6jLxb0Nxk2jpPBe12uHUJuMNX9XHkbUHklOUoHh86JpdCYqBw1mSF
	ePsw==
X-Received:	by 10.180.187.141 with SMTP id fs13mr2769221wic.13.1446035938379;
	Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Wed, 28 Oct 2015 13:38:53 +0100
From:	"Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Reduce pinnumber attribute
Message-Id:	<20151028133853.900dd1b6c702ad6004319d36@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:	<sig.0743b7a74f.30768420.HUeAWzzLFB@jawor>
References:	<20151021121348 DOT f3d3f466d0761fbd551f82ce AT gmail DOT com>
	<201510211834 DOT t9LIYn3t026935 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<sig DOT 0743b7a74f DOT 30768420 DOT HUeAWzzLFB AT jawor>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version:	1.0
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

> > > For almost all if not all cases I guess the pinlabel could be used
> > > as symbol pin number. If netlister use pinlabel attribute if no
> > > pinnumber attribute is available number of attributes could be
> > > reduced.
> > 
> > I can imagine that if we changed pinnumber to be symbolic, there would
> > be cases where pinnumbers would no longer be unique.  If we then
> > needed some unique ID for pins, pinseq might make more sense.
> 
> Pinseq is used by Spice netlister, so any bipolar transistor must have 
> pinseq=1 for collector pin, for example.
> But I think that it would be safe to drop pinnumber for sloted componenets.
> -- 
> Wojciech Kazubski

I could find the following cases:
  1. Spice netlister, work now.
  2. pcb footprint with only one mapping, work now.
  3. pcb footprint with different mappings, transistors for example.
  4. pin swapping, passive components for example.
  5. slotting, this may be possible by nested swapping.
  6. other tools.
As is now pin mapping is done by adding suitable attribute for each mapping, there are currently two number attributes in use for this purpose.

With mapping added then using *.sch file in other tool symbols could be kept simpler. It would probably be good with a mechanism to feedback attribues for example fo used mapping, pcb for example load the netlist separately. To feedback attributes may also be useful to display values from other tools.

Nicklas Karlsson

- Raw text -