X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Envelope-From: paubert AT iram DOT es Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 12:42:17 +0200 From: "Gabriel Paubert (paubert AT iram DOT es) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Improved Find Message-ID: <20150803104217.GA15314@visitor2.iram.es> References:

<631C0577-E61D-40BC-B200-96BA897092E6 AT sbcglobal DOT net> <20150802172151 DOT 45DD480395AE AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20150802212228 DOT GA17264 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es> <3DF2CEB4-A143-4C48-8DB9-C303603A75A1 AT noqsi DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3DF2CEB4-A143-4C48-8DB9-C303603A75A1@noqsi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spamina-Bogosity: Unsure X-Spamina-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Spamina-Spam-Report: Content analysis details: (-1.0 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: iram.es] -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -0.0 BAYES_40 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 20 to 40% [score: 0.2559] 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 Precedence: bulk On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 07:22:56PM -0400, John Doty wrote: > > On Aug 2, 2015, at 5:22 PM, Gabriel Paubert (paubert AT iram DOT es) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > > > I always had the impression that the attribute handling rules are too > > complex; > > Yes, although part of the problem is just confusing terminology. We could use the terms “override default” and “restore default” for promoting and deleting instance attributes. That would make the existing functionality clearer, I think. > > > it would be much simpler to say that all attributes are promoted > > Ah, but that causes chaos for those of us who sometimes use “heavy” symbols. At least for my workflow (I use gschem almost exclusively to design pcb), I have come to the conlusion that heavy symbols are a pain. I started from moderately heavy symbols and tend to go towards lighter and lighter symbols. >You often want to be able to edit the symbol once to change attributes for all of its instances. Couln't it be solved by better tools? >About five years ago somebody changed the default attribute promotion rules to promote more things, and I still haven’t completely straightened out the resulting mess. > > > and the symbol attributes are only sensible initial default values, which > > are always ignored when processing the schematics (generating a netlist > > being the most common example). > > Promoting *nothing* unless you want to override it works better with heavy symbols. > > > > > BTW, doesn't the net attribute have similar problems: many 74xx symbols > > have net=VCC:14 (or 16, or 20) and net=GND:7 (or 8, or 10). > > Yes, I forgot about that one. And that's why I essentially never use it in my own symbols, with the possible exception of ground pins for RF devices when they would make the schematics too cluttered (or when the person doing the layout with CadStar tells me that she needs one additional pin connected to ground for each via in the central pad of a QFN with numbers starting from above the largest package pin number. These are completely virtual pin numbers, which I can't even use as a ground connection for a probe, so it's a good thing that they don't even appear on the schematics). Gabriel