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

[Joerg <joergsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Stefan Salewski wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 14:33 -0700, Joerg wrote:
> 
>> That makes hardcore analog stuff very hard to understand. 
> 
> But you can do it with current gEDA: Put the functional symbol and the
> corresponding power symbol close together. The same refdes indicate that
> they belong together. There is not really a need that the power pins are
> attached to the functional (slot) symbol.
> 

That's how it is often done in Eagle. But I always butt up the power 
symbol against the A-slot part for parts that have them separate. Eagle 
calls power symbols up via an "invoke" command.

One reason why it is best to have them affixed to the A-part is that 
power pins are often used like input pins, for example to provide 
amplitude modulation. It's a very different world :-)

The main problem with gschem isn't the schematic itself but what happens 
after auto-numbering: All refdeses blown away, parts that need to remain 
on a common chip scattered all over the place. That's what often doesn't 
work in analog, and you need auto-numbering on large schematics. IIRC 
Peter Clifton had once said that this may not be as easy to fix as it 
looks. Just like Cadsoft seems to have a hard time with hierarchical 
sheet structures (which gschem handles nicely).

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/



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