On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:57 PM, DJ Delorie <[1...@delorie.com> wrote:
> "It only has to live a couple of hours"
I've made circuits like that. Not always intentionally, though.
You can buy parts from Vishay that do "rapid spontaneous disassembly"
by design:
"Exploding/Magic
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Joerg wrote:
>
> Yes, because you guys don't have to pay 2-3c for each additional
> transistor or 5c per FET :-)
At least not for those working. :-)
> "But it'll electromigrate itself to death in less than a year" ... "It
> only has to live a couple of hours" ..
> "It only has to live a couple of hours"
I've made circuits like that. Not always intentionally, though.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
r wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Joerg wrote:
>> The backplanes in our ultrasound systems are
>> usually north of 4000 pins and I have never seen a case where there was
>> not a schematic for that.
>
> In analog IC design it's fairly easy to get schematics even bigger
> than this - tha
Dan McMahill wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>> I started out with Futurenet Dash-2 in 1986, then Dash-4, then
>> self-employed with Orcad as my tool, later through several versions of
>> that and a few years ago switched to Eagle. That's what I am using right
>> now until I find something better. Eagle w
Joerg wrote:
> I started out with Futurenet Dash-2 in 1986, then Dash-4, then
> self-employed with Orcad as my tool, later through several versions of
> that and a few years ago switched to Eagle. That's what I am using right
> now until I find something better. Eagle won't handle hierarchies, o
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Joerg wrote:
> The backplanes in our ultrasound systems are
> usually north of 4000 pins and I have never seen a case where there was
> not a schematic for that.
In analog IC design it's fairly easy to get schematics even bigger
than this - that's what you get whe
On Jan 13, 2009, at 2:00 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Each geda user is going to
> have a preferred way of doing things,
"*A* preferred way". Actually, I have several. Depends on the project
and customer.
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
j...@noqsi.com
___
> Well ~25 years ago, you didn't need no stinkin layout program you
> just wire wrapped from the net list which was hand generated. I
> still have holes in my fingers from those bloody pins.
I still have my wire wrapping tool. Still use it too, especially the
wire stripper - handy for wire fixin
Well ~25 years ago, you didn't need no stinkin layout program you just
wire wrapped from the net list which was hand generated. I still have
holes in my fingers from those bloody pins.
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 16:00 -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Sure, but I don't think that's what gEDA was meant to
DJ Delorie wrote:
>> Sure, but I don't think that's what gEDA was meant to do.
>
> But geda *was* meant to be able to hook in other sources of data.
>
>> Ok, if gEDA is geared towards ASIC/FPGA that's different.
>
> It's not - *his* work is geared towards it, and he had a way to make
> geda work
> Sure, but I don't think that's what gEDA was meant to do.
But geda *was* meant to be able to hook in other sources of data.
> Ok, if gEDA is geared towards ASIC/FPGA that's different.
It's not - *his* work is geared towards it, and he had a way to make
geda work smoothly with his data needs.
Seems the mingw (tested under wine) c library's sscanf is mistreating
the format strings in Peter B's new colour processing, and trampling
more memory than it ought to.
%02hhx is not being correctly treated.
--
Peter Clifton
Electrical Engineering Division,
Engineering Department,
University o
John Doty wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2009, at 4:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
>
>> John Doty wrote:
Take a device with multiple parts in there such as the 74HC14 and
handle
it like Eagle and Orcad do: None of them has power symbols. Then if
you
must connect it to some special power net you
On Jan 13, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Larry Doolittle wrote:
> John -
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:54:21PM -0700, John Doty wrote:
>> It seems you want gEDA to cater to your unwillingness to master new
>> skills, learn better ways to do things. But gEDA's power is that it
>> frees you to use the better
On Jan 13, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>
>> Sometimes I make up my mind on footprints later. Anything but a
>> single
>> place to change this information is an invitation to err.
Yes, indeed!
>>
>
> That is why I am forcing myself never to switch a package in hindsight
> (which would be
John -
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:54:21PM -0700, John Doty wrote:
> It seems you want gEDA to cater to your unwillingness to master new
> skills, learn better ways to do things. But gEDA's power is that it
> frees you to use the better way, not constraining you to inefficient
> ways of doing
On Jan 12, 2009, at 4:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
> John Doty wrote:
>>>
>>> Take a device with multiple parts in there such as the 74HC14 and
>>> handle
>>> it like Eagle and Orcad do: None of them has power symbols. Then if
>>> you
>>> must connect it to some special power net you can "invoke" the powe
Peter Clifton wrote:
>> Most CAD systems use such routines and they can be called from within
>> the application. Eagle calls them user language programs (ULP).
>
> It just hooks in with a couple of lines in a config file (currently the
> "gEDA" way), then it executes the script action every time
Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:02:50 -0800, Joerg wrote:
>
>>> I don't know what might happen in the case where two slots had
>>> conflicting attributes. Perhaps this is something for a design rule
>>> checker to highlight.
>>>
>>>
>> The risk of running afoul in that direction i
John Griessen wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Stuart, that's all I really wanted to do, bringing some feedback
>> based on what I see in industry. As a consultant I get around a lot,
>> seeing all kinds of CAD systems and habits of people. Some of this is
>> very different from what many in
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:02:50 -0800, Joerg wrote:
>> I don't know what might happen in the case where two slots had
>> conflicting attributes. Perhaps this is something for a design rule
>> checker to highlight.
>>
>>
> The risk of running afoul in that direction is pretty low. The reason is
> th
Stuart Brorson wrote:
[...]
>> Here is another suggestion: Can you guys post a typical project that
>> some kid has done? Or at least a "mock project" if it's a first? That
>> way people like me can tell kids "Hey, take a look at this link and see
>> if you'd be interested and capable to do somet
Hi --
>> Paying developers to write code is a time-honored way of making features
>> get added to any software project. Don't hesitate to use it! ;-)
>
> Yes, I've read that. It is the other reason why I think feedback "from
> the trenches" is important. The really big donation pots are with
>
> Most CAD systems use such routines and they can be called from within
> the application. Eagle calls them user language programs (ULP).
It just hooks in with a couple of lines in a config file (currently the
"gEDA" way), then it executes the script action every time I copy a
component. gEDA jus
Peter Clifton wrote:
[...]
> I don't know what might happen in the case where two slots had
> conflicting attributes. Perhaps this is something for a design rule
> checker to highlight.
>
The risk of running afoul in that direction is pretty low. The reason is
that most designers I know do it
Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 18:53 -0800, Joerg wrote:
>> Peter Clifton wrote:
>
>>> Actually, your idea has got me thinking more about how we handle
>>> attributes on slotted parts, and the possibility that they could in some
>>> way be treated as an aggregate component for the pu
> For those who can't / don't want to dual boot, I've been working from
> time to time (based on the great efforts of Cesar Strauss), to build
> test a Windows port of the gEDA tools. Since there are still more issues
> to resolve there (compared to the Unix version), this has not yet been
> releas
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 06:56 -0800, Joerg wrote:
> Stuart Brorson wrote:
> > Hi Joerg --
> >
> > It's fun to see that you're back on the geda e-mail lists! Welcome
> > back! We thought you had defected to Kicad. :-(
> >
>
> To be honest I don't think I'll switch to gEDA. The refdes and slot
Joerg wrote:
> Thanks, Stuart, that's all I really wanted to do, bringing some feedback
> based on what I see in industry. As a consultant I get around a lot,
> seeing all kinds of CAD systems and habits of people. Some of this is
> very different from what many in this group (and also in the E
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 04:14 +, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:41:24 +, Peter Clifton wrote:
>
> > As an example I wrote for someone (and I ended up using it myself), I
> > have a script hook here which renames any component I copy back to "U?"
> > (removes the numbering),
Stuart Brorson wrote:
> Hi Joerg --
>
> It's fun to see that you're back on the geda e-mail lists! Welcome
> back! We thought you had defected to Kicad. :-(
>
To be honest I don't think I'll switch to gEDA. The refdes and slot
mix-ups are certainly surmountable but I found over the last cou
32 matches
Mail list logo
