At 09:20 PM 7/16/01 +1000, Ian Wilson wrote:
>In a recent discussion on re-annotation a regular poster to this forum was 
>skeptical that the synchronizer would cope with large scale changes to 
>designators, including resetting and then re-running the Sch annotation 
>process.

C'est moi.

>   This shows signs of "old-style netlist thinking" where one had to be 
> careful to back-annotate for each re-annotation as mapping was done 
> solely by designator and a Was/Is file.  I am getting quite frustrated at 
> what seems to be an almost deliberate policy of ignoring how it (the 
> synchronizer) does work and then having the nerve to throw the odd 
> grenade over the netlist battlement in order to spread FUD.  I use the 
> synchonizer and have since it became available; I do not really care what 
> others use; I do care that facts are being confused by throw away 
> statements - especially from someone respected for the depth of 
> assessment they usually undertake.

As I recall, I was quite specific in what I wrote that the synchronizer 
might be able to handle such situations; in general the sychronizer is a 
very powerful tool. I would still say that there are situations where one 
could get into trouble by massive renumbering, but those can be avoided if 
the PCB and Schematic are in the same .ddb and are under the control of the 
same person. The very fact that the synchronizer works through hidden links 
means that it could easily be confused by any of a number of events that 
would cause the links to be broken.

>Rant mode over and out,
>Ian Wilson

Glad you got it off your chest....



[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abdulrahman Lomax
P.O. Box 690
El Verano, CA 95433


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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