Hi Brad,

I couldn't agree with you on most points.

Brad Velander wrote:
> 
> Mira,
>         I am not sure which systems you may have used prior to Protel but of
> the systems that I have used the reactions that you report below are the
> norm.

I have used PCAD2001 for quite some time and could tell that there are 
no "features" Mira reported for the Protel.
 
>         Putting a net label with the same name on two wires, connects the
> wires exactly the same as if you drew a wire between them. 
Interesting question, didn't check this in PCAD. I need to try.

>         Putting your net label on the GND connection changed the net name
> for the pin to the net named in the label. I would be pretty sure that all
> of your GND nets were renamed by placing the net label on the GND net. It
> also sounds as if you only checked the one pin! I am not sure but I would
> bet that a net label has a higher priority over a power symbol net
> assignment. If the net label had not changed the net name to the net label
> name, how would you ever put a required netlabel on a net if the net label
> name kept changing to some other already pre-assigned net name?

But that's crazy! If I put Net label over the existing net it's worth to assign
net name to the label, not vice versa.
Just because Net Label is only a descripition of the Net.
 
>         Putting multiple net labels on a net, will result in one of the nets
> being the one actually assigned in the netlist. Which one is the one used in
> the netlist is based somehow on the physical locations of the net labels
> within the schematic sheets, i.e. first one the netlister comes across or
> possibly the last one it comes across as it is trying to compile the
> netlist.

Again, try PCAD2001. It's imposible to place different Net Label on the same
Net.
If you try, Net will be splitted into subnets and you'll get warning message.

>         Multiple parts with same designators, this is why there is a special
> check within the ERC simply to check for this occurrence. ERC, ERC, ERC,
> learn it, use it , live it. It will save your butt almost every time you use
> it. Remember that when you first brought in all those parts they had the
> same R? reference designators. As well, using the annotation tools within
> Protel is probably the easiest manner to update designators without
> duplication errors. The only manner by which you should have duplicated
> designators is through human intervention causing human errors.

Again, try PCAD2001. It simply will not allow you to have two components 
with the same designators and will automatically assign new available designator
for each new part placed.

>         Mira, this all 'sounds' like you are very new to EDA CAD tools, but
> yet you seem to be trying to define the future path and processes for
> others. 

Brad, I'm not very new in EDA CAD :-), but I have approximately the same 
set of questions as Mira to the Protel development team.
So I just hold my breath and think about them, as of "features" I have to live
with
and try to find some kind of workarounds if possible

WBR,
Yuriy Khapochkin.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to