X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Message-ID: <1391043267.2058.19.camel@AMD64X2.fritz.box> Subject: [geda-user] Pin length stretch for schematics symbols useful? From: Stefan Salewski To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:54:27 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com I think I have mentioned that idea some years ago already... Is an optional attribute for symbols of the form "pin_length_offset=200" useful? My intend is, that we can have one symbol which can be used with different pin length. Offset can be negative, so that we have shorter pins, which can be useful when space is limited. Of course, pins are not really special, so we can extend each short pin simple with a net. But my feeling was and is still that different pin lengths are useful, i.e for labels. And I can remember that people have argued that gEDA symbols are too large -- at least one was going to make a smaller set. Of course that is nonsense, because we can simple use larger title blocks, so symbols are scaled down for printout. Problem is still, that people may populate schematics very dense -- I did it myself. If we enable "pin_length_offset=300" for all symbols of a schematic that problem is solved, space is forced. Implementation should be simple, just extend all pins of an symbol by the given offset, extend that side which is used to connect nets. PS: Indeed I was thinking about how text attributes (labels, numbers, refdes) should behave in a perfect world when symbols are rotated, but that is of course not a trivial problem. So I remembered the pin_length_offset -- hope that at least that is trivial.