Re: gEDA-user: Bug report for renaming slots [Was: Re: gEDA on windows]

[Steven Michalske <smichalske@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 12, 2009, at 5:26 PM, Joerg wrote:

> Peter Clifton wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 17:01 -0800, Joerg wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, done. I hope it's acceptable that I did it without login. It  
>>> called
>>> me "nobody" (probably I did something wrong there) but I've  
>>> included my
>>> email address.
>>
>> We prefer non-anonymous reports, but that is mainly so we can get in
>> touch if needed. You left your email, so its fine - although you  
>> won't
>> get any automatic emails from Sourceforge if the bug gets further
>> comments, or changes status.
>>
>
> Ok, thanks for explaining, next time I'll register before filing.
>
>
>>> Since the file format is open in gschem it would probably be  
>>> possible to
>>> correct this problem with some kind of nifty "find and replace"  
>>> routine.
>>> However, I am not much of programmer, otherwise I'd do it and share.
>>
>> I'm not familiar with how the various renumbering utilities work, so
>> I'll leave it to their respective authors rather than getting into it
>> too deep myself.
>>
>> I've noticed through usage that gschem's internal renumbering utility
>> doesn't like it when I've got slotted components though - so if no- 
>> one
>> else looks at fixing it, I might give it an attempt.
>>
>
> That would be cool. I could imagine lots of people having a problem  
> with
> it. Mostly in the analog or low-noise digital world where slotted
> devices need to be on their own personal RC-filtered supply net.
>
> I am not a programmer but one method I could imagine would be to  
> have a
> switch that disallows splintering up slotted devices, meaning the
> devices can get other refdeses but it must be the same for all slots  
> of
> a device. It's the same for transistor arrays when temperature- 
> tracking
> will be lost if slots are mixed up. I believe it would be ok to do  
> such
> disallow or allow as a general setting, for the whole schematic.
>
My proposal,

when adding a slotted or multi part component it should have an  
attribute of an unique instantiation ID (UIID) that gets matched with  
the other symbols of that device instance.
	- have a ui pop up with this is a slotted device,  add to existing  
instance, or add new
		- have options for specific slot, next, undecided, or best slot

this works into deeper capabilities,  assisted slotting and multi  
symbol verification.

To make slotting more robust to errors like U1a and U1b both having  
slot 1,
To make sure that multi symbol parts have all their symbols, such as a  
microcontroller missing one of it's three symbols, it would warn the  
designer

it should match each slotted device with it's UIID
it should verify that each UIID is complete to it's devices rules.
	- i.e.  	a device of type X has the symbols of: one power symbol, one  
foo symbol, and one foo+power symbol.
		- There can only be upto 4 foo slots
		- there can be only one of the 4 foo slots with power.
		- There must be one power connection
		- Spare slots should have a default connection scheme.
			slot pin 1,2,3 should be tied to GND of the power for this UIID,  
pin 4 to VCC, pin 5 is NoConnect
		- etc...
it should renumber a UIID to the same refdes.
it should verify that a UIID is not over spent ( i.e. 5 slots on a 4  
slot part )

it should list under spent UIID
	- this would allow for post netlisting combinations.  example in a  
design you have 16  sub modules that use 2 of 4 slots in a part,  half  
of each share the same power nets,  we should assist the collecting of  
the parts with the same power ground nets.
	- e.g. printout, or pop up a slot editor. with the following info.  
refdes U1, U2, U3, and U4  have spare slots and share the same power  
and ground


This would require the schematic to physical stage to have a slotting  
tool that understood this.
	- this stage could output a slotting information report that PCB or  
other layout tools (humans) could read.
		- PCB could then allow for back annotating slot changes with the  
help of the report


we should drop the refdes+letter notation going forward.
	- The suffix should be generated not defined as part of the refdef
	- I don't want U1a to point to the first slot   then in U2a points to  
slot 3,  unless you tie them together  two locations can conflict/ 
confuse. e.g. a technician is debugging a part,  they have worked on  
three stages, but each part calls it stage?/U1A well unfortunately  
each section being differently laid out had U1A being different  
slots.  making shortcuts that are often taken they measured the wrong  
pins, because a b and c were pins 1 2 and 3 on U1  but 3 2 and 1 on U2.

just some thoughts
Hardkrash

> -- 
> Regards, Joerg
>
> http://www.analogconsultants.com/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user



_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user