Hi Dan, El jue, 02-03-2006 a las 16:09 -0500, Dan McMahill escribió: [snip] > I'm generally opposed to using "special" netnames. I've managed to jump > in here late in the discussion, but it seems to me that you shouldn't be > connecting your schematic up as a short. > > Don't forget, you have 26 other backends besides the PCB backend. > > Was this just to keep drc2 from complaining about unconnected pins? > > If so, perhaps we can come up with a better no connect symbol which > doesn't use a fixed net name.
If you have unconnected pins and you don't use the DRC, it's all ok. If you want to use the DRC, you should have some way to tell it that you really want to leave a pin unconnected. I've seen several approaches to this: - Use a special no connect symbol. Currently there is such symbol in gschem, which connects that pin to a net named "NoConnection". - Another approach here would be that gnetlist don't add that pin to the netlist (it can know it is a special symbol), but then the DRC won't be able to check it. - I've also seen some DRC markers so the DRC don't check a given net, but this situation would be like the previous options. Thoughts? Regards, Carlos
