On 01:22 PM 9/04/2001 -0700, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax said:

>Of course, there might well be a schematic where improvement over the use 
>of a dummy bus is realized; just because I can't think of the situation 
>doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
This is an example I face often:
Try drawing a full top-level sheet showing the interconnections between 
sheets - the control busses etc need to be broken out into individual 
ports, then sheet entries then wires on the top level sheet.  This is 
clutter.  One solution is to make Nets and Ports Global and use the bus 
wires purely as cosmetics - but this is not always desirable.  Being able 
to pass a collection of non-bus netlabels as one would make the top level 
sheet less cluttered in this case as well as reducing the clutter on lower 
level sheet somewhat. (We like to have a top level diagram showing sheet 
connectivity even though we (almost) always use nets global - after 
checking with a more restricted net connectivity to find subtle misconnections.

There may be yet another solution though, allow an attribute for a net 
label, or even better a Sch Global Nets design rule, that allows you to set 
specific nets as global.  So these net labels act like power objects 
currently do.  The downside is that you can't control exactly what sheet(s) 
that net connects to.  The netlabel could be displayed/printed differently 
to show its global nature.  Another way of achieving this might be to make 
a power port symbol that looks like a bus entry (just need to sort out the 
net label text alignment issues).

I don't like these suggestions as much as simply allowing busses to support 
more complex naming or a new net collections entity that interfaced to sch 
net classes and rules.

Ian Wilson


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To join or leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
*                      - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to