kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/22/2016 8:27 AM, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 19.02.2016 21:40, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> 
>> I asked JP to take a look at this patch for me and he went ahead and
>> fixed it which caught me a bit off guard.  Apparently your patch had
>> some issues in the ERC.  I apologize for the confusion.  I'm assuming
>> you will have to revise your PinShape and electrical type patches to
>> work with JP's changes.
> 
> JP's patch seems to be more correct -- my assumption was that if the
> label orientation is copied to the ElectricalType field, it is also used
> for that (because otherwise there'd be no point copying it).
> 
> If it isn't used, then simply using the enum type to make sure that no
> incompatible enum values are assigned, and fixing the two instances
> (init and sheet label orientation) is the right way to go.
> 
> In the long run, it might be nice to warn people about sheet labels with
> the wrong orientation.

AFAIK, labels are only used to connect either off sheet or within sheet
wires and/or buses or name a contiguous net.  Their orientation is not
really important because eventually they tie component pins together and
it's the component pins electrical definition that determines whether or
not there is an ERC violation.  If a wire and/or bus label has no
connection (another label that connects two non-contiguous wires), then
the ERC will complain about unconnected wires.  I'm not sure warning
users about the label orientation is useful unless as JP had mentioned
about best practices.  I'm not sure this is something the user will
appreciate.

> 
> My other patches have been rebased on top, I can easily resubmit them.
> 
>    Simon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>