← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: Re: Gathering ideas of library and module


2009/11/6 Lorenzo <lomarcan@...>:
>> Okay, that might be my misunderstanding of the value field then. If I
>> understand right, in the library editor Value is used for the
>> component name, but in eeschema Value could be changed to be the
>> actual value of the component? This makes a little more sense compared
>> to how I thought it worked.
> It's called VALUE exactly for that reason :D

In the library editor, editing the value changes the chipname. In the
library editor the chipname and value are the same thing, and they
should not be.

>> For a new user I think this is still very confusing.
> It's an industry practice. I would actually get confused if it was the way around :P

Having the schematic symbol name and value as the same field when
creating a component is not an industry practice. There should be a
component name and a value field that are used independantly of each

>> look at this to see if there is anything that can be done. In eeschema
>> even having a label showing the component library name would be a big
>> hint that the value field can be edited and no longer relates to the
>> component library name.
> There is such a label actually. It's the 'chip name' in 'edit component'.You can edit that to change component, too! Drawing it would be a little redundant... like "Resistor" beside the drawing of a resistor :D

Yes there is separate field, Chip name. I've only seen that because
you mention it here and I've subsequently gone looking for it.

>> Although I've never seen this question raised on the user list!
> Probably because it's common behabiour

This is not common behaviour

>> > If you are suggesting saving a user defined set of default field names
>> > to be created each time you create a new project than that would have to
>> > be added, which by the way sounds like a good idea.
> That would be a good idea but I would retain the ability to specify custom fields. For example I often add the 'vendor code' for prototyping that could be an RS code, a Farnell code, a Mouser code or a Distrelec code. Fortunately they are easily distinguished by their format so just a 'vendor code' is sufficient.

Yes, of course retain the ability to specify custom fields.

Best Regards,