X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-TCPREMOTEIP: 207.224.51.38
X-Authenticated-UID: jpd AT noqsi DOT com
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CD304ECD-2107-4E7F-90CF-42279D5C9D2F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Pin mapping (separate symbols from mappings)
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2
From: John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <201510190408.t9J48ZbC015157@envy.delorie.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 22:53:35 -0600
Message-Id: <F9B802B2-A8F6-4A6F-9429-02161A60B6C5@noqsi.com>
References: <20151018204010 DOT 9cce6a231dcc296256e187bd AT gmail DOT com> <201510181843 DOT t9IIhmWo025346 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20151018234424 DOT c0551dad9bef0859130239d9 AT gmail DOT com> <36B94694-F2AC-4A75-A8EB-40A1CE9A534C AT noqsi DOT com> <201510182225 DOT t9IMPkxK032763 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20151019003814 DOT f62620bf0fec77e65104c105 AT gmail DOT com> <BED51F9A-F6FF-4A23-B18B-C2EC8BB9DAB6 AT noqsi DOT com> <201510190242 DOT t9J2gl7w009345 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <282EF9EF-E103-4101-BB56-A0A365AFFEBE AT noqsi DOT com> <201510190408 DOT t9J48ZbC015157 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
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


--Apple-Mail=_CD304ECD-2107-4E7F-90CF-42279D5C9D2F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=windows-1252


On Oct 18, 2015, at 10:08 PM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

>=20
>> Then you're talking about a *drastic* change to geda-gaf, or a new
>> schematic toolkit entirely.
>=20
> Why?  Just because we have no way of figuring out which symbol is =
which?

Well, just looking at the gnetlist API, nearly every function uses the =
refdes to identify the =93package=94, and the pinnumber to identify the =
pin. This is both in function arguments and returned data. You can often =
leave out pinseq or pinlabel, but a pin without pinnumber is trouble.

>=20
>> But I don't see why a symbolic pin cannot have a number to identify
>> it: it need not have anything to do with the physical pin.
>=20
> I doctored those symbols to have symbolic pins, but if you instantiate
> two deafult 7400.sym's you get pin numbers - but they both have pins
> 1,2,3, so no help there.
>=20

Sure. But in an abstract flow, those numbers are not necessarily the =
physical pin numbers. Your map determines the translation. Original-U1-1 =
maps to U1-2 while original U2-1 maps to U1-5.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com



--Apple-Mail=_CD304ECD-2107-4E7F-90CF-42279D5C9D2F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWJHdPAAoJEF1Aj/0UKykRjxcP/jE98XvSw41rvJebc+c2Gwo8
8hllLluKcpHcJHmqTJPFfp+pj7DR3PeMPYvDCFb/Fxn8Q7insLr/hyXJmyQEer+5
MUC5/AzP/8Yu1Rd0QMm0Gurs2rBP0pQr10DgUXrbA7FD65YpBvIKJz+4z6/OZz3+
e+XcTDW2l1IsjGPLuD518oQGkzynPTdtIN6tF7FUQt3kqIC7SJ4ac72GBB4eCveu
kI+57QQqC5/+GCRt0Nd1gmxrrWO113CRKbkoRZhFwZgoYOJA76eEfZKnvAKlNtAU
/t1KR3WQic9HBxOu25GnXRPatosibBNF7eY3GTkbxaA/rqjbuOZoGAs78ay+/ehN
GiKoWjR3ibapxbPjYu8rwaY0yyaNPuLIIEKDT/OjwaMFpRpsNzQOSXZ9rz2mFhdp
TvHztPe3eiKGhdBVf7MOac3t7QXCTzXNyu5SrNh1tOEvE1UNWS1CeNtp3CNy6Z6g
xhXb/g2gChFFhk7pMQYUUv+cYnefrPZVuTypWz1bkgylpe51bCPyMtUKaTybfv5S
bFafeFvylCfzzQjMgUOC+Yd374WqJ2jfmgLWSmVtgwFKmEwCfznyOMNcQfOY0/u8
Yzw19mrFza0E8HrB5beAacij2LEZ4ZlbANHdm23hA2lzvoHMZaq+itEnEdYUO5xL
SJW9lYWWsJXbwB7Q6S9a
=OD1b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_CD304ECD-2107-4E7F-90CF-42279D5C9D2F--