On Tuesday 26 June 2007 20:16:26 Mark Cianfaglione wrote: > Just to add a slightly different view from my point of view... > > Generally in most $$$ tools the components are selected from a common > library. When you "archive" the design it captures a copy of each > component into a local copy. This archiving also then alters the library > config file so that it will only look locally(design archive = local) for > any components first. If any additional components are required it can > retrieve them from the common directory as it won't find them in the local > directories. Mind you this behaviour is possibly a user defined > capability. Once again, this assumes the presence of a "design", which is the same concept a "project". Which is something that is not > I also agree with the principle of a symbol with a part selector. For > example if a resistor gets selected a small window could pop open and one > can select the value/footprint/manufacturer that they wish. These tables > of parts could be generated using a perl script (I currently do this with > Cadence Concept/Allegro) It saves a lot of time... This approach works well for parts where the pinout is always the same (resistors, capacitors, many diodes & transistors) but fails spectacularly for more complex parts. However, it's worth considering. Note that you could do something quite similar _now_ using a couple of Scheme functions and the component-library-funcs rc file procedure (as long as you're running git unstable). Peter -- Electronic Systems Engineer Integral Informatics Ltd
Attachment:
pgpvl1MphjLUS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user