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

[Dave N6NZ <n6nz@xxxxxxxx>]

Stefan Salewski wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 13:49 -0700, Dave N6NZ wrote:
> 
>> Well, then IMHO, KiCad sucks. :)  Power belongs on a symbol by itself, 
>> and that symbol belongs on an infrastructure page, not on the same page 
>> as functional data flow.  But that's just me. (And all other right 
>> thinking people :)
>>
>> -dave
>>
> 
> You may be right...
> But if there are people who like slotted parts for which one slot has
> visible power pins and the other slots have not, then we should
> investigate if we can integrate this functionality into gEDA without
> breaking something. If it can be done, without destroying something or
> making things much more complicated, and there is someone who will code
> this very carefully, the we should not say that it is bad. At least not
> too loud.
> 

Yes, sure.  Thus the smileys.

<serious>
Design automation tools should not force any particular methodology, nor 
should they preclude any if they can help it within practical reason.
</serious>

Now back to your regularly scheduled sarcasm...

-dave

> 
> 



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