I was thinking about multi-part symbols, actually. It would be kool to draw a symbol for all the business pins and another symbol for the power pins. Then I could have a sheet just for power/gnd. But I wondered about netlisting and refdes support. Bummer that renumbering doesn't preserve relationships.
Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: > On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:58:14 -0700, Stephen Williams wrote: > >> I'm planing a circuit where some chips have a wide variety of different >> power supply requirements. I'm debating with myself whether I should >> create symbols that have net= attributes for all the various power >> types, or if I should attach attributes from outside the symbol, or >> create pins for all the various power types of the chip, or whatever. > > Invisible information in the schematic is bad(tm). That's why I prefer > separated power symbols. These explicitly wear all the power pins a > component needs. They can be put somewhere in the backwaters of the > sheet. That way I avoid cluttering of the schematic but still have all > the power pins visible in print. > > However, support for such multi part symbols is not complete, yet. > Renumber does not honor shared refdeses. The part with the footprint > attribute has to be inserted last. -- Steve Williams "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. steve at icarus.com But I have promises to keep, http://www.icarus.com and lines to code before I sleep, http://www.picturel.com And lines to code before I sleep." _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user