X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
From: "Wojciech Kazubski (wk AT ire DOT pw DOT edu DOT pl) [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
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 13:02:27 +0100
Message-ID: <sig.0743b7a74f.30768420.HUeAWzzLFB@jawor>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.9 (Linux/3.16.7-24-desktop; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <201510211834.t9LIYn3t026935@envy.delorie.com>
References: <20151021121348 DOT f3d3f466d0761fbd551f82ce AT gmail DOT com> <201510211834 DOT t9LIYn3t026935 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Assp-Version: 2.4.5(15272) on ASSP.ire.pw.edu.pl
X-Assp-ID: ASSP.ire.pw.edu.pl 
X-Assp-Session: 5950F688 (mail 1)
X-Assp-Original-Subject: Re: [geda-user] Reduce pinnumber attribute
X-Assp-Client-SSL: yes
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

> > 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