| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
W dniu 19.07.2014 01:40, Carl Poirier pisze:
Given the current amount of microcontrollers on the market, the creation of collective libraries does not make sense. The library will continue to grow and soon it will have to be divided into smaller ones.2. Symbol Library Names (.lib files) ------------------------- 2.1. Category of parts, may be shortened for common components. ex: "Microcontrollers", etc.
If we divide the libraries only to manufacturers, they also grow to enormous size.2.2. Manufacturer.
My proposal has already been notified once and I realize it in my own libraries. Just divide symbol libraries for manufacturers *and* functional category or families. For example: Atmel_XMEGA.lib, Ti_MSP430.lib, Ti_LDO.lib, Actel_FPGA.lib or better Actel_ProASIC3.lib, Actel_Igloo.lib...
You can also divide it up into folders. For example, the "Atmel" directory may contain libraries: avrtiny.lib, avrmega.lib, avrxmega.lib, qtouch.lib, etc. Directory "Ti" could be more diversified: msp430.lib, regul.lib, buckboost.lib, littlelogic.lib, op-amps.lib.
Such divisions will allow us to minimize the inclusion of collective libraries and facilitate the first phase of the search of appropriate symbols during schematic capture.
4.4. Any modification to the original footprint, indicated by appending the reason. Ex: different pin count: "LT1129_8pins", different pin ordering: "transistor_PNP_pinswap1"
>Why not just use the name provided by the manufacturer with the information encoded about the correct case? Instead of "LT1129_8pins" just use "LT1129IS8" for SO8 variant. For D2PAK version use the "LT1129IQ". Additional (human readable :-) ) informations could be provided in documentation fields or keywords.
Regards Kerusey Karyu
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
