According to the manual, [15..0] may be used as well as [0..15].

There are other problems with connecting with buses and ports than can 
cause errors, warnings, and actual connection failures.

I was getting a persistent ERC "unconnected passive pin" warning with some 
pins that were connected through a net label to a bus and from there to a 
port off-sheet. The net list, however, reported the pins as connected. I 
finally looked on the Protel Knowledge Base. Sure enough, there is an 
"issue" known for about a year regarding this, no. 2176.

Problems like this with ERC are one reason why many users simply ignore the 
ERC. Bad idea. It's ugly, but once I've verified that those pins are 
actually connect, No-ERC markers are going on them. It would be much better 
if I didn't have to do that, next revision, that connection might get 
broken and I wouldn't know it.

Protel should fix this!

In this case, as it turned out, there was indeed an error; some sheet 
entries had been placed on the wrong sheet symbol. I could easily have 
missed this because of the confusion caused by false warnings....

At 09:41 PM 1/30/2002 -0500, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>At 02:49 PM 1/30/2002 -0800, Peter Bennett wrote:
>>I recalled having a problem with [0..15] vs [15..0] in the past, but
>>checked a recent job and found I had used both orders on it (for
>>different busses).
>
>*Were these busses connected through ports/sheet entries?* If not then the 
>bus names may be irrelevant. At least that is my question....

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abdulrahman Lomax
Easthampton, Massachusetts USA

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to