On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 05:17 PM 7/12/01 +0100, Steve Wiseman wrote:
> 
> >Hmm. If you use numeric allocation offset (start this sheet at 100, etc),
> >the annotator gets it completely right - no allocation re-use. This is a
> >straightforward, easy to understand, bug. We've all done similar.
> 
> Actually, it does not get it "right," according to what we usually want and 
> might well expect from how Annotate behaves under other circumstances. If I 
> have a C101A, and two C?, and annotate with starting 100 and suffix A, you 
> will end up with the original C101A plus C100A and C101A, the designator 
> has been duplicated.

Aargh. Once again - if you use the suffix, it gets it wrong and reuses
designators. If you don't use the suffix, it gets it right and doesn't
reuse desiganators. This doesn't deserve this much discussion :)

> It is only if we set the offset higher than any existing number, such that 
> no old numbers are in the assigned range, that the results are correct.

Not true - if you're just using a numeric offset, there's correctly no
reuse.  

> Problem is that the existing behavior is not good enough to deal properly 
> with the subject situation. Yes, you can reset designators and that will 
> solve one problem, but, as in the present situation, it will create 
> another, the lack of correspondence of designators between the old 
> schematic and the new one. This can make quite a mess.

I've never experienced this, and I've added components to many schematics
without forcing a renumbering. Protel gets this right, unless you're using
suffixes, which I'd not tried before. 

> The synchronizer might handle it properly, but it would not fix any 
> accessory documentation, like the note that says "Do not stuff C101A."

That information I keep in a separate file as a kindness to my
assemblers. Since there's no C101A in the BOM or on the board, it's not
terribly important information, it just helps reduce confusion. 

> And here I run into a brick wall. I have a vague memory that we have 
> discussed in the past a shortcoming of the global edit Copy Attribute 
> operation. I could find no way to use it to add a suffix. Perhaps someone 
> knows how to do this!

Hmm. Not me...
Is this the kind of thing I ought to be using macros / hand-crafted
servers for? (obviously not for this particular problem, which can be
solved elsewhere, but it's a nice, small, clearly defined problem...)
 
Steve


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*                      - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to