Have a question about CadSoft EAGLE?  Ask our Expert, Jorge!

Hi Jorge:

Schematic: How to fix wires after moving components?

I am just re-learning Eagle after being away from schematic editors for some time. Previously used Orcad and a couple of other packages over the years.

The question at hand: After creating most of a schematic, it's often necessary to move components around the page for a better visual effect. When I move a component in Eagle, the wires stay connected, but the proximal segment of line rubber-bands to some crazy angle, and the rest of the wire stays dumbly where I originally put it.

(a) Am I using the wrong wiring tool? Is there some other kind of wire which automatically repositions to a sensible orthogonal route?

(b) If repositioning the wires isn't automatic, is there at least a command to do it?

(c) If that's not implemented, then could you give some tips (or point to a tutorial) on how to speed up the process of manually editing the wires... my attempts to do so eventually arrive at the right result, but are extremely tedious.  Thanks!

-- Graham

Look at help split

r

Hi Josef-Michael -- thanks for your comment. I have indeed discovered split. But on that subject, how do you unsplit? That is, combine line segments that are no longer needed?  But more to the point, why do you need split in the first place, isn't there a command to just tell the program to fix diagonal rubber-band segments into a minimal number of sensible orthogonal segments?

On 04/04/14 02:13, Graham Wideman wrote:

Well, perhaps it's the as-designed behavior, but it's hardly expected.

It was to me.

I

know of no other boxes-and-connecting-lines kind of program that leaves

the interconnections in such a trashed state after moving the boxes.

I've come across several.

Not

all programs get all  repositioned lines optimal, or even properly avoid

collisions, but at least they make an effort.

Actually my experience with programs that do try to keep orthogonal and

second-guess your intent is that they universally make a right pig's ear

of it and waste a lot of my time rectifying that.

Eagle Scehmatic's

apparently intentional behavior places a high cost on refining the

layout of a schematic, and makes it hard to develop a schematic

incrementally.

Not in my experience. In my experience it imposes less cost than the

ones which try to guess at what you're doing.

Jorge -- thanks for your reply.

> There's no bug, it's working as designed and expected.

Well, perhaps it's the as-designed behavior, but it's hardly expected. I know of no other boxes-and-connecting-lines kind of program that leaves the interconnections in such a trashed state after moving the boxes. Not all programs get all  repositioned lines optimal, or even properly avoid collisions, but at least they make an effort. Eagle Scehmatic's apparently intentional behavior places a high cost on refining the layout of a schematic, and makes it hard to develop a schematic incrementally.

Related question: I want to show net names on a schematic, so I name a net. I then right-click on the net and choose Label, whereupon I position the net name adjacent to the net. Later I move the net, and the label fails to follow the net that it pertains to. Do I have to move the net name label separately too? Or is there a better way to do this?

Thanks!

On 3/31/2014 10:05 AM, Graham Wideman wrote:

I'm still convinced that there have to be some editing functions I've

not discovered yet, because trying to edit wire by manually fiddling

with individual segments is so primitive. It's also not clear why, when

using right-angle wires, would moving a component cause the the wires to

adopt diagonal paths. That seems like a bug.

Hi Graham,

I hope you're doing well. There's no bug, it's working as designed and

expected. As you've noticed its a matter of using Move and Split, we've

never implemented any code to maintain the angle of a net, which is the

command that's supposed to be used to define electrical connections in

the schematic. You could also delete a few segments and then redraw them

to clean them up.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

Jorge Garcia

On 3/31/2014 10:05 AM, Graham Wideman wrote:

I'm still convinced that there have to be some editing functions I've

not discovered yet, because trying to edit wire by manually fiddling

with individual segments is so primitive. It's also not clear why, when

using right-angle wires, would moving a component cause the the wires to

adopt diagonal paths. That seems like a bug.

Hi Graham,

I hope you're doing well. There's no bug, it's working as designed and

expected. As you've noticed its a matter of using Move and Split, we've

never implemented any code to maintain the angle of a net, which is the

command that's supposed to be used to define electrical connections in

the schematic. You could also delete a few segments and then redraw them

to clean them up.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

Jorge Garcia

On 04/04/14 02:13, Graham Wideman wrote:

Well, perhaps it's the as-designed behavior, but it's hardly expected.

It was to me.

I

know of no other boxes-and-connecting-lines kind of program that leaves

the interconnections in such a trashed state after moving the boxes.

I've come across several.

Not

all programs get all  repositioned lines optimal, or even properly avoid

collisions, but at least they make an effort.

Actually my experience with programs that do try to keep orthogonal and

second-guess your intent is that they universally make a right pig's ear

of it and waste a lot of my time rectifying that.

Eagle Scehmatic's

apparently intentional behavior places a high cost on refining the

layout of a schematic, and makes it hard to develop a schematic

incrementally.

Not in my experience. In my experience it imposes less cost than the

ones which try to guess at what you're doing.

Jorge -- thanks for your reply.

> There's no bug, it's working as designed and expected.

Well, perhaps it's the as-designed behavior, but it's hardly expected. I know of no other boxes-and-connecting-lines kind of program that leaves the interconnections in such a trashed state after moving the boxes. Not all programs get all  repositioned lines optimal, or even properly avoid collisions, but at least they make an effort. Eagle Scehmatic's apparently intentional behavior places a high cost on refining the layout of a schematic, and makes it hard to develop a schematic incrementally.

Related question: I want to show net names on a schematic, so I name a net. I then right-click on the net and choose Label, whereupon I position the net name adjacent to the net. Later I move the net, and the label fails to follow the net that it pertains to. Do I have to move the net name label separately too? Or is there a better way to do this?

Thanks!