X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 20:58:58 -0400 Message-Id: <201509090058.t890wwDB014552@envy.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <55EF7C26.8080108@ecosensory.com> (message from John Griessen on Tue, 08 Sep 2015 19:24:06 -0500) Subject: Re: [geda-user] New experimental netlist features References: <201509082040 DOT t88KerD6005455 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <55EF7C26 DOT 8080108 AT ecosensory 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 Precedence: bulk > If a buss is labelled buss (n) a kiss, or (v) to kiss. I don't label mine ;-) > [0..3] and is in contact with a buss having label x[0..31] all the > info is there to figure out that the [0..3] buss is called x[0..3] It's the "and is in contact with" that's the problem. In gnetlist, all net segments that are connected are considered as one net. A collection of connected bus segments would be one bus. Naming different segments of that bus differently causes ambiguity. The problem is as pictured here: http://www.delorie.com/pcb/bus-pins.html If a bus has multiple signals in it, and you give different ends (or branches) of the bus different netnames, you've created a conflict that the netlister has to magically resolve. The way bus segments work *now*, the bus segment itself is the magic that keeps the nets connected to the bus rippers from being "connected" and thus they're allowed to have different names.