Hello! On 2017-12-14 14:08, Marco Ciampa wrote: >> But when you add aliases I run into troubles to keep things separate/clear: >> {RAM} appears to me as an unnamed bus containing the net RAM. WTF is that? >> MEMORY{RAM} appears as a bus named MEMORY containing the single net RAM. >> I would expect to access that net via MEMORY.RAM - Oops. >> >> I am definitely irritated by a net MEMORY.OE pulled out of an bus named >> MEMORY{RAM}. 8-( >> It's impossible to distinguish bus aliases from nets of a bus. > > Apart from the _very_ unpolite expression, I agree here.
Off-Topic: Okay, this really puzzles me. There was really no intention to offend somebody personally. I just used WTF and Oops (talking in monologue) to emphasize that the syntax or representation seems inconsistent or confusing to me. I might also have used a confused smiley like "@:-{" to express that. I am really sorry if these phrases are considered very unpolite. English is not my native language. In case I missed the point here in general, maybe somebody could give me feedback off-list. >> Idea: It might be nice to virtually allow folding/unfolding of the net >> collection contained in a bus, i.e. by showing MEMORY{*} or MEMORY{..} or >> MEMORY{+}, whereas the '*' or '..' or '+' is shown in a different colour. >> If that's still to long, I would not mind renaming the bus to MEM{..} or >> even M{..}. > > The idea that Clemens is describing here (IIUIC) is that what you really > nead is _not_ a bus alias (although is a good idea anyway...) but a more > compact equivalent syntax for a BUS name. To be more clear, what I've tried to express: ... a more compact representation of a bunch of nets of a bus. A bus name could simply be renamed (locally/per sheet or globally), if it appears too long - instead of having an alias defined. But the possibility to use aliases (for nets and/or busses) is a nice-to-have feature. > Once you have defined bus names like MEMORY{something} and MEMORY.OE for > the single bus entity, you should be able to write something for just the > bus name like MEMORY{+} or MEMORY{*} or MEMORY{..} (may I add my 2 cents > here? Why not MEMORY{...} tree dots to distinguish it from the vector > syntax?) instead of have to specify always all the bus elements in the > bus name. > So you should have on the bus name just this label MEMORY{...} (three > dots ... I like it!) as a bus description and MEMORY.OE and such as > connections outputting from the bus. I was also considering the ellipsis '...' but in classical ASCII, they are three characters wide, that's why I ended up with .., + or * to keep it short. But since we arrived in Unicode, this can be solved by using the horizontal ellipsis single character: U+2026 '…' or in our case the midline horizontal ellipsis U+22EF '⋯'. Regards, Clemens _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp