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.

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.