At 03:52 PM 5/21/2002 -0500, Robison Michael R CNIN wrote:
>hi bruce,
>oh!  i used no name for them.  and it went ahead and
>netted everything together, even across different
>packages and specific parts!  i'll look into this.
>maybe i can name them and lose the bad net.

I don't think so. Hidden pins are for power nets. Period. Some say they 
should not be used at all. Yes, hidden pins with no name will tie together 
into a net with no name.... If you name them, they become a net with the 
name you give them. If each one has its own name, well, this should work. 
But it would be a royal pain to manage.

If a pin is to be hidden because you don't want it to show on the schematic 
and you don't want it to connect to anything, make the library part without 
the pin....

>i hid the pins to more closely mimic the original
>schematic.  i had to have them somewhere or else my
>footprints wouldn't sync up with the components.

No, pins and footprint names are not connected. If a pin is missing from a 
symbol, it will simply be given no net when the net list is loaded or the 
PCB is synchronized with the schematic. Yes, if you have a pin on the 
schematic that is assigned a net, you will get an error when Protel tries 
to take the net information into the PCB, but the reverse is not true.

Unless these pins are completely nonfunctional, i.e., not connected inside 
the device, it is poor practice to omit them from the schematic. Rather, 
they should be visible and a No-ERC directive popped on them to suppress 
the unconnected pin warning. So by trying to hide the pins, you are simply 
bending over backwards to reproduce what should probably be considered a 

If you don't try to conceal the pins, you can use standard schematic 
symbols and have that many fewer opportunities to make a mistake.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to