Re: gEDA-user: More robust support of multi-part symbols.

[Kai-Martin Knaak <kmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 10:32:15 -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote:

> Maybe what you need instead of a complete parts list is a depends-on
> specification,

Sounds good. There is no change for the simple case, say opamp plus opamp 
power symbol. And it will work for your more sophisticated strategy too. 


>> 6) gschem should read the parts list and insert all parts at once.
>   
> I don't see the point in this

It makes sure, all dependent symbols are in the schematic and get the 
same refdes. I understand, that this will be no much use in your case. 
The feature should be optional then. 


>> Next step would be to treat slotted components like multi-part symbols.
>>   
>>   
> I've always thought that slotting was just a special case of
> multi-symbol, where the two symbols were visually identical.

Well, slots are not only visually identical, but can be swapped. This 
wouldn't mix well with multi part symbols.

---<(kaimartin)>---
-- 
Kai-Martin Knaak
Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6C0B9F53



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