Hi Stuart, On Saturday 29 January 2005 13:27, Stuart Brorson wrote: > > I've taken a look at that kind of error: > > "order of pinnumber in slotdef does not match pinseq order" > > A word of caution: > > There are situations where pinnumber != pinseq. In particular, my > spice-sdb netlister triggers off of pinseq in order to know which > order to emit pins for SPICE netlisting. This is because SPICE > .subckts require that the nets be listed in a particular order to > connect them correctly. This order is not the same as the numbering > of the pins on the package.
That's true. Lets take a look at 4000/4002-2.sym. Load it three times and attach slot=1 and slot=2 to two of the symbols. All three symbols have now different pinnumbering. Those with slot attributes are wrong. The solution is ordering the slotdef definitions: slotdef=1:2,3,4,5,1 slotdef=2:12,11,10,9,13 instead of: slotdef=1:1,2,3,4,5 slotdef=2:13,12,11,10,9 The pinseq attribute will not change. regards Werner
