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=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=UcNxnYBs9yEt2c2KL2nj9CDL5i5esvkxpFqWukFfjnI=;
        b=0owVW2ubPJKDjnW8eXRX3XWwmesSVowWkzM+26FlQS6meFxU7vjMNBoogzt09/hlC4
         nZWarJBy1jTCI4Mr+Zz1nzI8bemPtKD16aK0o1GowFE2ATIQ67tiYtmD4Kph5I3LUqN8
         1UTWsfIgR5skFvbse0xjsEjevvWlbtdDU/U8iAiXGV4Of+In+TgZ5MU+L0Udr2uEPqVd
         87t6rBB8IOLdmJbYi37nK1hNG/V4Ln+uEembwsvAw2rKDSJTVkoJ8NOfvInlBL30ibRi
         iiJ/382WlHHWO1o2OAlvBgWJBBvSm3yKc84ihYyNEcds3d0lLSf5Y0ZP8pk8YuLBHLFh
         uurg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.51.144 with SMTP id e16mr11490418icg.2.1382901601018;
 Sun, 27 Oct 2013 12:20:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1382900899.22421.6.camel@pcjc2lap>
References: <CANhYM9F_CxrD4yL=rgg76m1f9sL29wNNjNn3KjYZ5xbADBQBtw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1382900899 DOT 22421 DOT 6 DOT camel AT pcjc2lap>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:50:00 +0430
Message-ID: <CANhYM9HzRHXgw3yyfz44f3xH7Y_N+dWoVujJdPv55mNKaV-V4A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Merging ICs and nets with gsch2pcb
From: James Jackson <james DOT a DOT f DOT jackson DOT 2 AT googlemail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf301cc2dab0286d04e9bdde43
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

--20cf301cc2dab0286d04e9bdde43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Peter Clifton <pcjc2 AT cam DOT ac DOT uk> wrote:

>
> Do you _need_ hierarchy, would a multi-page set of flat schematics be
> better?
>

Nope, don't _need_ it, but it suits my way of working. Happy to be flexible
though.


> IMO, not explicitly calling out the power connections is a mistake, just
> like using symbol embedded (hidden) power-nets on components is.
>

Ah, I do explicitly call them out, but in a separate location from the
functional use of the part. This means my design isn't cluttered with power
rail decoupling stuff, however there is a sheet that is full of only that
kind of stuff.


> I "might" be wrong though, and _perhaps_ you can split the sub-circuit
> symbol into multiple pieces when instantiating the sub-circuit, but
> again - I don't think that is a wise thing to do - even if it happened
> to work.
>

I've done this with symbols rather than subcircuits - for example, two
symbols for an op amp, one with only the functional pins, and one with only
the power pins. The former exists on a 'process' schematic, the latter on
my power schematic.

What is it exactly you're trying to achieve with hierarchy?
>

Ease of navigation (read as laziness if you want). The fact that
everything's getting prefixed with the subcircuit refdes on netlisting
makes me think this really isn't the workflow this was designed for.

Yours,
James.


>
> Best regards,
>
>
> --
> Peter Clifton <peter DOT clifton AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk>
>
> Clifton Electronics
>
>

--20cf301cc2dab0286d04e9bdde43
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail=
_quote">On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Peter Clifton <span dir=3D"ltr">&=
lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pcjc2 AT cam DOT ac DOT uk" target=3D"_blank">pcjc2 AT cam DOT ac DOT uk</a>=
&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br>=
</div></div>
Do you _need_ hierarchy, would a multi-page set of flat schematics be<br>
better?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Nope, don&#39;t _need_ it, but =
it suits my way of working. Happy to be flexible though.</div><div>=A0</div=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

IMO, not explicitly calling out the power connections is a mistake, just<br=
>
like using symbol embedded (hidden) power-nets on components is.<br></block=
quote><div><br></div><div>Ah, I do explicitly call them out, but in a separ=
ate location from the functional use of the part. This means my design isn&=
#39;t cluttered with power rail decoupling stuff, however there is a sheet =
that is full of only that kind of stuff.</div>
<div>=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;=
border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I &quot;might&quot; be wrong though, and _perhaps_ you can split the sub-ci=
rcuit<br>
symbol into multiple pieces when instantiating the sub-circuit, but<br>
again - I don&#39;t think that is a wise thing to do - even if it happened<=
br>
to work.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;ve done this with symbol=
s rather than subcircuits - for example, two symbols for an op amp, one wit=
h only the functional pins, and one with only the power pins. The former ex=
ists on a &#39;process&#39; schematic, the latter on my power schematic.</d=
iv>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
What is it exactly you&#39;re trying to achieve with hierarchy?<br></blockq=
uote><div><br></div><div>Ease of navigation (read as laziness if you want).=
 The fact that everything&#39;s getting prefixed with the subcircuit refdes=
 on netlisting makes me think this really isn&#39;t the workflow this was d=
esigned for.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Yours,</div><div>James.</div><div>=A0</div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid=
;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
Peter Clifton &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:peter DOT clifton AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk=
">peter DOT clifton AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk</a>&gt;<br>
<br>
Clifton Electronics<br>
<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--20cf301cc2dab0286d04e9bdde43--