kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

We can revisit this but only on the condition that we do not break
existing schematics.

On 3/8/2017 3:12 PM, Oliver Walters wrote:
> Then, can we look at this when the new eeschema file format is
> introduced? Then we'll have the ability to map one pin to multiple pads
> so there'll be no need for invisible pin connection.
> 
> On 9 Mar 2017 02:38, "Wayne Stambaugh" <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     Thank you for the reply.  If your patch is causing this, then I wont
>     merge it.  Breaking schematics would violate our backwards compatibility
>     policy.  I'm fine if we change the wire connection tool to prevent this
>     in the future but we should not be changing existing connections.
> 
> 
>     On 3/8/2017 4:20 AM, Oliver Walters wrote:
>     > Wayne,
>     >
>     >     Is there any possibility that this will break existing schematic
>     >     netlists?
>     >
>     >
>     > There is no guarantee that this will not change netlist, especially as
>     > netlist association is performed based on x,y position of pins.
>     >
>     > I have just tested this, opening the same schematic in versions with
>     > this patch ON / OFF. The NC connections are made / unmade whenever the
>     > schematic is loaded.
>     >
>     > I do not believe there is any way around this.
>     >
>     > Oliver
>     >
>     > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Wayne Stambaugh
>     <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
>     > <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     Oliver,
>     >
>     >     Is there any possibility that this will break existing schematic
>     >     netlists?  I'm assuming this patch only prevents the user from
>     >     generating new invisible/no-connect connections.
>     >
>     >     Is anyone else opposed to this?
>     >
>     >     Cheers,
>     >
>     >     Wayne
>     >
>     >     On 3/7/2017 7:33 AM, Oliver Walters wrote:
>     >     > Is there any objection to applying this patch in its current
>     form? Note
>     >     > that all it prevents is users accidentally joining pins that
>     are already
>     >     > invisible AND non-connect.
>     >     >
>     >     > Cheers,
>     >     > Oliver
>     >     >
>     >     > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Oliver Walters
>     >     > <oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>>>>
>     >     > wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     >     Urgh, patch attached here.
>     >     >
>     >     >     On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Oliver Walters
>     >     >     <oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     >     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     >         I have amended the patch to only ignore connection
>     of pins that
>     >     >         are both INVISIBLE and NC (Electrical Type = Not
>     Connected).
>     >     >         This will improve the safety of the current
>     libraries which do
>     >     >         contain many parts with NC pins set as invisible.
>     >     >
>     >     >         It will also NOT change the behaviour of people
>     using invisible
>     >     >         pins for one-to-many connection.
>     >     >
>     >     >         Thoughts?
>     >     >
>     >     >         On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Oliver Walters
>     >     >         <oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     >         <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     >             Hi all,
>     >     >
>     >     >             The attached patch prevents invisible pins from
>     being
>     >     >             connected using the wire tool in eeschema.
>     >     >
>     >     >             a) If you connect a wire endpoint to the same
>     position as a
>     >     >             pin endpoint, they are NOT connected visually
>     >     >             b) Wires and insivible pins are also ignored
>     during netlist
>     >     >             creation
>     >     >             c) This does not affect the ability of invisible
>     power-pins
>     >     >             to automatically connect to global power labels
>     >     >
>     >     >             Is the current behavior of connecting invisible
>     pins to wire
>     >     >             endpoints desired? Or is it just an aberration?
>     >     >
>     >     >             If there is a very good reason that pins not
>     visible in the
>     >     >             schematic are able to be connected silently?
>     >     >
>     >     >             before: http://i.imgur.com/3gModvW.png
>     >     >             <http://i.imgur.com/3gModvW.png
>     <http://i.imgur.com/3gModvW.png> <http://i.imgur.com/3gModvW.png
>     <http://i.imgur.com/3gModvW.png>>>
>     >     >
>     >     >             after: http://i.imgur.com/r8O7c3Y.png
>     >     >             <http://i.imgur.com/r8O7c3Y.png
>     <http://i.imgur.com/r8O7c3Y.png> <http://i.imgur.com/r8O7c3Y.png
>     <http://i.imgur.com/r8O7c3Y.png>>>
>     >     >
>     >     >             (Note the 'dangling' wire-end indication)
>     >     >
>     >     >             Cheers,
>     >     >             Oliver
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     > _______________________________________________
>     >     > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
>     >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>>
>     >     > Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
>     >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>>
>     >     > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
>     >     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>>
>     >     >
>     >
>     >     _______________________________________________
>     >     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
>     >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>>
>     >     Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
>     >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>>
>     >     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
>     >     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>>
>     >
>     >
>