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:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=y2J8vZmwrjfAw15/dLP3cRB5/zepwkaojxAW6LX5a7o=;
        b=tAGY1964mTobQmXU8wD3f/SedDQVwGiex9YMC5lOI3nd9bNJbet2FkqLTJr6uWwZOL
         f+27KdXJuuOk1NH4tjTsnROke+MNjcLDuktsN7SUB4cwm3orFbqRuq6XoYXdVp+/vDaM
         XkvEkp8MAHElXMMwan6gSEYRQgsCEoxSrXmR0/wQtzpeb9zP/DmoTsiFtDvNVfSzjxa0
         RSBYkxXDhosTLBc34uVmzPvZJ4Gv1/EdLH4yP+cObYFYQGbYKcEHKW/T9XAoyZ4WSO6I
         5xs3KnX3GnfeE1g7noYSrfu8CAUyS2XfC3VVBzSdmHkRvtr9BTwI0UGyJxJegJhxhe61
         M/Sg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.14.6 with SMTP id l6mr23804667lbc.91.1421563243685; Sat,
 17 Jan 2015 22:40:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20150117222659.0CE0581A5EB7@turkos.aspodata.se>
References: <CALSZ9gp08b7L5HMesdT3yX-di-0PsqqjRA0b0RKGbc4FtOm6rQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20150117213351 DOT 106EE81A5EB7 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
	<CAOFvGD5+=KfJ=6m+96ASmDe9QZ1DeSiJoQAWXbBGww0H+3z85g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOxVtSS9FVpgh1eYdj4tSr8LVkdp0=H8VVgxVAM=tYCqaAQY5g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20150117222659 DOT 0CE0581A5EB7 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 01:40:43 -0500
Message-ID: <CAM2RGhRapmzSh+g_ELuXnaQk-EwbmFwZQriV_Z_WEOE36Vm8Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] HIDDEN PINS IN A SYMBOL
From: Evan Foss <evanfoss AT gmail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t0I6elJo021912
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

I know it looks ugly but I always show all the pins. I feel it better
reflects what the situation is more honestly.

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 5:26 PM,  <karl AT aspodata DOT se> wrote:
> Sergey Alyoshin:
>> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Jason White
>> <whitewaterssoftwareinfo AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 4:33 PM,  <karl AT aspodata DOT se> wrote:
> ...
>> >>> How can I make the pin statements in the symbol that would allow 2 anode
>> >>> pins and 4 cathode pins?
>> >> Nothing stops you from overlap the pins, like the attached fp.
>> > Cool! I had never though of that.
>> Overlapped pins already connected with zero length net, so this should
>> not be done for N.C. pins. It would be convenient, if pinnumber can
>> have a list value, e.g. "2,7,8".
>
> If the pins are overlapping in the sym, the semantics must (?) be that
> they have a cu path internally, or ?
>
> If you have something that looks like one pin, shouldn't that iimply
> that regardless of which "sub-pin" you use, you get the same connection.
>
> If you have pinnumber=2,7,8 and connects a NC sym directly to that, do
> you want the NC sym be implicitly triplicated ?
>  What if you move the NC sym a little so there is a little short net,
> and then what if the net is connected to something else ?
>
> I think only meaningful semantic is if it looks like "one" pin, it
> should behave as if all "sub-pins" share the same cu-path internally.
>
> ///
>
> Now for the case of ic's with lot of NC pins, maybe just not drawing
> thoose pins in the sym is the solution. What do you think ?
>
> Regards,
> /Karl Hammar
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Aspö Data
> Lilla Aspö 148
> S-742 94 Östhammar
> Sweden
> +46 173 140 57
>
>



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/