[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: Light vs heavy gschem symbols?

> uups,
> I thought that gschem is usable as light and heavy library?
> I thougt - there is the possibility to add all attributes which are 
> wanted in the library, but it is also possible to add the attributes 
> later in the schematic.

It is true that you can put attributes directly into the symbol file.
However, I believe that only some of them get promoted (overwritten)
into teh schematic file.  Most are forced to remain only on the
symbol.  The list of promotable attributes is hardwired in the code. 

> If there will be a double definition of an attribute (perhaps in library 
> SO8 in schem DIL8) then gsch2pcb shall use the latest definition, the 
> definiton which is made in the schematic.
> So erverybody can create his library like he want  to do...
> Now I understand, that it is not like I thougth?
> So, what about this idea?

It requires some re-architecting.  Not a major amount, but some.
Hence the need for discussion.

An interesting side point is this:  Enabling back annotation from PCB
to gschem is part of the equation.  Currently, pin attributes like pin
numbers *only* live in teh symbol file.  To enable back annotation we
need to find a method to overwrite pin attributes at the schematic
level.  This necessitates a design change in libgeda since the .sch
file parser would need to recognize when to overwrite pin attribs.