Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/09/23/05:28:20
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 10:42 +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>
> Well, I was none of the complainers. In fact, I like the symbol size
> to
> text relation in the default library. Note, I am talking about the
> size of
> the symbol excluding the pins. The pins seem rather large in the
> default
> lib. This makes for unnecessarily awkward positioning if space is
> tight.
>
Note, text size in relation to symbol graphic is not really an issue,
because it can be arbitrary scaled all the time. Default grid size to
symbol size is more important. A very fine grid gives us very many
possible positions to put elements and nets, which makes it
"difficult". For gschem, I would use 200 as major grid generally, but
then not both ends of resistors are on grid.
The pin length: General long pins give us space for text, and schematic
looks not too dense populated. (My early schematics where all too dense
populated.) Sometimes we need indeed short pins, but not often. Of
course we may generally use short pins, which we extend with net
segments generally. But that makes editing much work. It is much easier
to move one resistor, than additional too short net segments.
I was thinking about symbols where pin length is adjustable by
attributes, in 100 units. Easy for schematic tool itself, but of course
netlist generator must understand that too. The other solution is to
offer a version with very short pins for symbols like resistors, and
maybe an easy way (context menu) to switch between.
- Raw text -