kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/30/2014 11:42 AM, Benoît Roehr wrote:
> 
> On 30/10/2014 13:13, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>> On 10/30/2014 6:54 AM, Benoît Roehr wrote:
>>> On 30/10/2014 08:50, Marco Ciampa wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 01:22:34AM +0100, Benoît Roehr wrote:
>>>>> Beware here, they are not footprint anymore when they are on the
>>>>> board, have a value, a reference and so on... They are components.
>>>>>
>>>>> Footprint is the right term for the standalone "print" a component
>>>>> will drop on a PCB. You can name them so in the footprint library,
>>>>> in the component propriety and so on... In the PCB editor, this
>>>>> object is a Components and should be named so.
>>>> Ok, clear, thank you very much for the explanation.
>>>>
>>>> So we have:
>>>>
>>>> a symbol     = a generic graphic for schematic
>>>> a component  = a graphic with a meaning (value, reference, etc.) for
>>>> schematic
>>>> a footprint  = a generic graphic for pcb
>>>> a module     = a graphic with a meaning (value, reference, etc.) for
>>>> pcb
>>> In the case the object is part of an assembly (have a designator, value,
>>> reference, footprint...) I would name it Component, not module.
>>>
>>> I think calling "Component" both the schematic parts and the pcb parts
>>> is the right way to go.
>> No.  Do not use components for both PCBs and schematics.  It will only
>> make things more confusing.
> The fact is that, I strongly believe there is no difference between a
> Component in the Schematic and a Component in the PCB. They are the same
> thing and should be named equally.
> 
> For example:
> If U1 is a component on the PCB, it have a symbol and a footprint. In
> eeschema it is represented by its symbol, in pcbnew it is represented by
> its footprint. But the object behind the symbol or footprint
> representation is still U1, and U1 is a Component !
>>
>> Footprint = PCB features upon which a component is mounted
> Indeed :)
>>
>> Component = Schematic symbol with value, reference, etc.
>>
>> Personally I prefer symbol instead of component but for historical
>> reasons, changing it will most likely confuse users so I would rather
>> keep it component unless there is a huge outcry from users.  Given that
>> it hasn't happened, it's not likely to happen.
>>
>> Keep it simple.  My main concern is consistency.
> Well, about consistency:
> 
> Let's say I have a method returning a list of objects in the PCB.
> 
> A list of footprint would be:
> - SOT-23, SOT-23, SOT-23...
> - SOIC-8, SOIC-8, SOIC-8...
> - ...
> 
> Or a list of footprint would be
> - Q1, Q2, Q3... (all SOT-23)
> - U1, U2, U3... (all SOIC-8)
> - ...
> 
> ???
> The second list is a list of component. Those are two distinct things
> that could not be both called footprint. It is context dependant.
> 
> 
> I answered to the patch because I made the assumption that this part of
> the code:
> 
>      RR( _( "Values" ),          MOD_VALUES_VISIBLE,    
> UNSPECIFIED_COLOR,  _( "Show footprint's values") ),
>      RR( _( "References" ),      MOD_REFERENCES_VISIBLE,
> UNSPECIFIED_COLOR,  _( "Show footprint's references") ),
> 
> refers to components implanted on board. If it is only related to the
> footprints drawing, then footprint suits.

The value an reference are merely text fields that are defined in a
footprint not an actual component itself.

> 
> But ! If 'values' refer to the value of a component (10k resistance for
> example), and/or if reference could be something like 'ATmega32U4', then
> it should say 'Show component's value'. It is consistant because you
> call all the devices that will be implanted on the PCB -> Component, and
> this naming convention starts in eeschema. Calling them footprint here
> is not consistant in this context.
> 
> Please think about it.

I have thought about it and while I respect your opinion, I'm sticking
with my original decision.  I see no major benefit from your naming
scheme and a lot of potential confusion.

>>
>>> a symbol     = a generic graphic for schematic
>>> a footprint  = a generic graphic for pcb
>>> a component  = a graphic with a meaning (value, reference, etc.) for
>>> schematic and PCB
>>>
>>>> right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp