Le 07/02/2018 à 15:25, Jon Evans a écrit : > Yes, we can only throw an error if a wire connects to only invisible pins at > a given location.
Wires connected to only invisible pins is not necessary a error: It happens for most of power symbols. > I will add this to my queue since I am already planning on some reworks to > ERC code after the 5.0 > release. > > Thanks, > Jon > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 8:36 AM, Maciej Sumiński <maciej.sumin...@cern.ch > <mailto:maciej.sumin...@cern.ch>> wrote: > > The ERC check sounds sensible. I know that invisible pins are also used > to place many pins in a single spot, so you can connect multiple pins > with just one wire (think of e.g. ground connections). We may need to > take this case into account. > > Cheers, > Orson > > > On 02/07/2018 02:32 PM, Jon Evans wrote: > > We could hold this until after 5.0 and either add an ERC check, or > better > > yet make it so that you can't actually make connections to invisible > pins? > > > > -Jon > > > > On Feb 7, 2018 08:29, "Maciej Sumiński" <maciej.sumin...@cern.ch > <mailto:maciej.sumin...@cern.ch>> wrote: > > > >> Hi Wayne, > >> > >> No, I have not reviewed the patch. I had some doubts about potential > >> problems caused by invisible pins creating hidden connections. If user > >> is neither aware of their presence when selecting a symbol, nor will > >> notice them after they are placed on a schematic sheet then he may end > >> up accidentally connecting them to some wires. IIRC we do not have an > >> ERC test to check against such case, so I was not sure if it is a safe > >> change. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Orson > >> > >> On 02/07/2018 02:21 PM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > >>> Orson, > >>> > >>> Did you ever respond to Jon about this? I guess the question is > whether > >>> or not to show invisible pins in the component chooser. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Wayne > >>> > >>> On 1/15/2018 9:31 PM, Jon Evans wrote: > >>>> Hi Orson, patch is attached again, hopefully it goes through this > time. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Jon > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 4:24 AM, Rene Pöschl <poesc...@gmail.com > <mailto:poesc...@gmail.com> > >>>> <mailto:poesc...@gmail.com <mailto:poesc...@gmail.com>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 15/01/18 10:00, Maciej Sumiński wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Perhaps we should have an ERC rule > >>>> that warns about invisible pins being connected to a wire, > any > >>>> thoughts? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Invisible pins are used for three distinct applications. > >>>> > >>>> The first one is to remove clutter by hiding pins that should > not be > >>>> connected. ERC will complain if you connect such pins if they > have > >> the > >>>> electrical type "Not connected". > >>>> > >>>> The second application is to create "power labels". A invisible > >> power > >>>> input pin is handled as a global label. These pins are meant to > be > >>>> connected. > >>>> > >>>> The third application is again to remove clutter by stacking > pins. > >> Here > >>>> you have one visible pin and several other invisible pins at the > >> same > >>>> location. (Normally all these pins have the same name and > electrical > >>>> type. With the exception of power input pins, power output pins > and > >>>> output pins.) > >>>> Such pins are again meant to be connected. > >>>> > >>>> This means a ERC rule that complains about connecting hidden pins > >> will > >>>> create too many false positives. Having a lot of false positives > >> means > >>>> users will start to ignore ERC output. > >>>> > >>>> It might be a good idea to have a symbol checker that complains > if > >>>> invisible pins are used differently than i described above. > >>>> In other words: complain for invisible pins if they are not part > of > >> a > >>>> stack or of types NC or power input. -- Jean-Pierre CHARRAS _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
