Re: gEDA-dev: Broken slotting

[John Doty <jpd-at-NOSPAMwispertel_dot_net>]

On Sep 11, 2007, at 11:02 PM, Steve Meier wrote:

> I have been violating the rule "All pins must have a pinseq=#  
> attribute
> attached to the pin object. " regularily. I reason, that if a  
> device has
> only one gate then no slot list is needed. Now I wonder if the slot  
> list
> is needed for spice?

What a Spice netlister needs is a way to figure out in what order the  
pins are for the device or subcircuit instance. It uses pinseq for  
this purpose. This is independent of the use of pinseq for slotting.

It seems to me that eventually we'll want to move the slotting and  
pin assignment stuff to a database (see the lm7912 thread) to support  
different packaging and usage of symbols. In that case, each pin will  
need a unique identifier, and pinseq serves that purpose. But we  
shouldn't keep using it directly for Spice (or anything else).  
Rather, it should key the actual parameters, as it does in slotting.  
Right now, pinseq is confusingly overloaded, but it need not be.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd@noqsi.com




_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev