X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=FYRr4UHZEIAbQHomFRije0rUKO6R35977AD3ji8TSI0=;
	b=zAOluQnCoI2KkJ4EbENe7yAowyeUX7MJeBU6vjHroH0PjhyMttsIjjzH7OiHX436OG
	+K+aVnoY3oQn4WkCHloMraSmgAsxQat8RibH+C/l2ZnbCp5gvWiIMBDT39UpeeqyK68e
	u9Y4NGd+pDbmZtzsKkWUlKIMYRbnOqypdrf+VdZ+qmPPzU0C3oorxt3FOwBmombOLktm
	qnQo5rbJTWM4yBP9oYuQHDEGc1OjzaPLTxoo7dpsu9zI8sCEa2BQd2pELXGCGNzoXwqT
	v3bHC90L/id8Wd4VFsumNHmwHhDMcQeXOtBQlamY8Idny3FZbKxS5G8pA4yxSE/wMfl7
	ZYAQ==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.152.203.233 with SMTP id kt9mr4637175lac.84.1406151162143;
	Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<53D01C7F.7030703@ecosensory.com>
References:	<jql5oeoex9l7r932tnwtp2i5 DOT 1404908642063 AT email DOT android DOT com>
	<53C5DDD4 DOT 404 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhTH+K91JkhakxYgW5UZVWqGZ18zRMwkjvxjJRoCUWCBzA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<53CFC7DA DOT 1090500 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhSDhodNzBn5wh3=N5K-uujsOe4HXyY2HeWJ91L8bUtezA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<53D01C7F DOT 7030703 AT ecosensory DOT com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:32:42 -0400
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhREO98SDToqSOga-QP6YV5wFdLNSDBPMoz0ZhfoW+uikA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Re: Layers and footprints
From:	Evan Foss <evanfoss AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Ok. I figured array parts would be more like R01.001 or something but
if you do away with refdes entirely for parts in the array life gets a
lot easier. That said it still feels like an issue for post gschem
stuff.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:35 PM, John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com> wrote:
> On 07/23/2014 01:46 PM, Evan Foss wrote:
>>
>> I should think the subcircuit really just
>> needs some special tag on it's page that will indicate the Rx, Cx and
>> other reference designators will be altered after netlisting &
>> tessellation on the layout.
>
>
>
> In chips or big circuits with repeated elements the burden would be huge.
> Flat netlisting would grind to a halt for circuits with 40 elements repeated
> 64 times
> in one area, and 50 other cases of the same in the whole circuit.  That
> example
> is 128K circuit elements used to make shift registers, and not even
> estimating RAM
> and ROM to use.
> But printed electronics that goes on the door of a washing machine could get
> that way easily.
> There would be plenty of ROM to encode your programs, and some RAM to run
> out of,
> all made in a slow large CMOS type of organic or nano inorganic
> semiconductor set of materials
> printed on the surface of the door panel so it can dissipate heat and have
> low low leakage
> and low low power consumption, and slow boring performance to go with that.
> But fine for
> motor control and a UI, and there would be a few chips added to transition
> to the faster networking
> circuit world around that slow washing machine bot.  The circuit area would
> look like
> all wires and flat patches of capacitance and transistors with no 3D
> components anywhere except a few
> at the edge with an ethernet cable or wireless going out, or at the edge
> with the motor control
> where there are a few special power transistors attached..
>
>
> Think about making a 64 bit ALU...it would get super tedious to have unique
> ref des's for
> all those transistors.  You really just need to know they come from "such
> and such"
> module that has been simulated plenty and can be used with up to so much
> length of wires away.
> Each placement of a module does not need its own unique identifier for
> module's R1, R2, C1.
> They can all be called  R1, R2, C1, and exist in different instances of the
> identical
> module, where the instances are kept track of in the netlist and by gschem.
>
>
> There would be no components needing a ref des anyway in an array repetitive
> circuit case, since
> the circuit elements would be completed from primitives like in chip
> mask making, not by an assembly step needing a ref des.



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -