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=_79BDAA38-8FD5-457D-9FBD-31085928B78F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Hierarchical design, pin number not needed
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2
From: John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <20160126100402.55b76b26cdc848856d4f7ad5@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:47:07 -0700
Message-Id: <606D7765-5854-49F7-A271-DC773EF829C1@noqsi.com>
References: <20160125193136 DOT c1297d2b8e17f291e2250a4c AT gmail DOT com> <9763429C-BEFE-443F-B4E7-EDB3BA4FF55D AT noqsi DOT com> <20160125223859 DOT 8f1120bf6f98c3ca60ee2b00 AT gmail DOT com> <8FA3D453-216B-489F-8862-EA004827B590 AT noqsi DOT com> <20160126021440 DOT f61e6e8be6bf4da5d2bafb25 AT gmail DOT com> <8DF71CDE-4E0D-481B-B240-99FAFE082328 AT noqsi DOT com> <20160126100402 DOT 55b76b26cdc848856d4f7ad5 AT gmail 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=_79BDAA38-8FD5-457D-9FBD-31085928B78F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=windows-1252


On Jan 26, 2016, at 2:04 AM, Nicklas Karlsson =
(nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] =
<geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

>>>>>>> Then using hierarchical design netlist complain if there are no =
pin numbers in symbol although in pcb it seems everything work OK =
without the pin numbers.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> It doesn=92t work OK if you=92re not flattening hierarchy.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> The number is in the symbol but not in the schematic underneath. =
How is the number used? Or what purpose does it fulfill?
>>>>=20
>>>> There=92s no way get get pin attributes or connections without the =
pin number in the back end. The hierarchy traversal in the core can =
=93cheat=94 because it completely removes the pin from the netlist =
structures. A hierarchical back end needs the pin, though, and therefore =
needs the pin number.
>>>=20
>>> So if hierarchical back end needs the pin how does it use it then =
there is only refdes and no pin number on sub sheet? Would it possible =
to add an enumerator in between instead?
>>=20
>> It depends on the back end. The older SPICE back ends relate the =
numeric part of a spice-IO device=92s refdes to a pinseq attribute on =
the subcircuit symbol. My gnet-spice-noqsi imitates the gnetlist core =
behavior, relating the refdes on an io symbol to the a pinlabel on the =
subcircuit symbol. I don=92t know what other hierarchy-aware back ends =
do.
>=20
> Since gnetlist and your gnet-spice-noqsi relate the refdes on an io =
symbol to the pinlabel there should be no need for pinnumber then using =
these backends since the number is not used.

Gnetlist represents connections to nets as (refdes pinnumber). Without a =
pinnumber, there is no way to determine if a pin is connected to a net.

Gnetlist represents connections to packages as (pinnumber . netname). =
Without a pinnumber, there is no way for a pin on a package to be =
listed.

Gnetlist looks up pin attributes by pinnumber or pinseq. Without one of =
those, you can=92t get pin attributes. If I was grumpy today, I might =
argue that pinseq is a flawed concept.

In short, pinnumber is the attribute that generally identifies pins for =
a variety of purposes. Back ends need it.

>=20
>=20
> Nicklas Karlsson
>=20

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



--Apple-Mail=_79BDAA38-8FD5-457D-9FBD-31085928B78F
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
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=Xmus
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_79BDAA38-8FD5-457D-9FBD-31085928B78F--