X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oyxVmvJPmkJhJnyP/bwkx7F4+ksL4Z+WwcyiZjkCLrA=; b=gliTxiuV7oXzTyYZxZmSQf4Hy8hrWs8Gn18c+ogt+WxV31dudh+Nb8rxeQ0N4WvruE 18AtIlovsEgJ5CxMmDx1uFpDVsUpP7phxtmn87yunVmZQQNwP+4FhhaUnuegDlLLiCBm zQNlLLOY2C75Y3fLYfXC2nISjk8/G6ejeY8xZb7ioiMj+vQ8TdOUJnEasWa1i9/ZLooX FqDYtbzJW1BK62J3trWdr1ODLuiWcvPrFjr8+klARp3C+JDG5LqwD6dqG01fy3Yn1UCs 6YOHjqGg2NNzX5F0J/RqAy6lfGuWm7UTVWLHT6Zc1NYCiEgK0TKc0LCvAH/VI4Ap0IJu fVkw== X-Received: by 10.28.171.135 with SMTP id u129mr62800738wme.99.1451420121159; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 12:15:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 21:15:16 +0100 From: "Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Project leadership (design error in the core of gschem) Message-Id: <20151229211516.583ca6d4ab4b3cccc522e72d@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <43CC8F96-6452-40FA-9DFB-E0983721C19C AT noqsi DOT com> <20151229094603 DOT 782092b57563336883546bfd AT gmail DOT com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 > > slots: > > The slotting mechanism is fundamentally worthless for a the majority > > of cases were I would want to use it. Look at the 7400 symbols were > > they have a whole extra symbol for the power pins. That is > > conceptually IMHO something that should be a slot but you can't do > > that because all symbols have to have the same number of pins and > > geometry. > > > > In places were slotting could be cool we don't use it right in the > > standard symbol library. Take the symbols for the larger xilinx chips. > > I would rather each section of the chips I/O be it's own slot so I can > > show the FPGA connections near what they are connected too instead of > > putting the FPGA on it's own page (most of the time). Likewise > > breaking it up into more symbols would mean not wasting most of a page > > on the empty area inside the FPGA symbol. > > > > > > > I'm having a little trouble understanding what your definition of "slots" > is. I think the current gschem concept of a slot is what I am used to, > i.e. a slot is an interchangeable element of a chip. So a 7400 has 4 nand > slots, and they are identical. As far as I am concerned, slots are only a > tool for back annotation. During schematic capture, you can assign the > gates from a chip in any order, then when laying out the PCB, you can > choose which slot routes the best, and swap them around, and then back > annotate. > > > Bill This is the way it should be ideally. I had some arguing earlier about usefulness of pin numbers in schematic, they have meaning then mapping to a footprint but not before. Sometimes only one mapping is available but at other times there are several to choose from. I think in most EDA tools work is started by adding complete information for a component: symbol, footprint, pin mapping, ordering information, ... In gschem only a symbol is added. The database of complete information is usefuls but I think it should be run the other way, in gschem attributes are filled in and then a suitable entry is found in the database and if not a new entry need to be created or more attributes added. This method would be especially useful then ordering information need to be changed or added. Nicklas Karlsson