Why do I need to draw the same symbol N times?

zoltan wrote on Fri, 23 September 2016 05:29

I wonder if I'm alone with the wish of having just one symbol, with

every possible signal drawn. Then, when it gets placed to the

schematic

with a package selected, the not bonded pins grey out and don't allow

wires to be connected to them?

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Fri, 23 September 2016 07:47

But currently (7.x), if the symbol differs slightly betweeen packages,

 

you have to copy/make a new symbol, and add/remove pins. Sometimes it

would have been nice if unconnected pins at the symbol were hidden at

the schematics, if they are not user/connected to the chosen package.

Yes I think this would be nice. For a lot of cases the existing system

works fine but being able to have a single device which deals with the

entire part in all its variants rather than having to have duplicate parts

with slightly different symbols would be a big benefit in terms of having

much tidier and easier to use libraries. I like the idea of greying out or

hiding unconnected pins but sometimes that might not be enough as a variant

can possibly change a pin function (i.e. it bonds the pin to another

function internally). For this reason I think being able to specify

alternative symbols within the device as well as alternative packages would

be a big benefit too.

Best Regards,

Rachael

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

zoltan wrote on Fri, 23 September 2016 05:29

I wonder if I'm alone with the wish of having just one symbol, with

every possible signal drawn. Then, when it gets placed to the

schematic

with a package selected, the not bonded pins grey out and don't allow

wires to be connected to them?

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Fri, 23 September 2016 07:47

But currently (7.x), if the symbol differs slightly betweeen packages,

 

you have to copy/make a new symbol, and add/remove pins. Sometimes it

would have been nice if unconnected pins at the symbol were hidden at

the schematics, if they are not user/connected to the chosen package.

Yes I think this would be nice. For a lot of cases the existing system

works fine but being able to have a single device which deals with the

entire part in all its variants rather than having to have duplicate parts

with slightly different symbols would be a big benefit in terms of having

much tidier and easier to use libraries. I like the idea of greying out or

hiding unconnected pins but sometimes that might not be enough as a variant

can possibly change a pin function (i.e. it bonds the pin to another

function internally). For this reason I think being able to specify

alternative symbols within the device as well as alternative packages would

be a big benefit too.

Best Regards,

Rachael

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Hi All,

This is definitely a pretty split topic it would be hard to make a

suggestion either way.

To answer the original question, the way I would handle this is a I

would create one symbol which would represent the smallest( the one with

the fewest pads) of the packages.

I would create a device for the smallest package using just that symbol.

Let's say that the next package up has 4 extra pins. I would create a

new symbol with just those 4 pins. When I go to make the device for this

package, I would add this symbol plus the symbol with the 4 extra pins.

Repeat this for as many packages as necessary. Basically, instead of

subtracting pins from the largest package configuration, we add pins to

the lowest. You can adjust the add levels to make the two symbols come

in together.

I don't like the idea of greying out pins in the schematic or x-ing them

out in some way. I think it makes the schematic untidy and adds

unnecessary additional info.

hth,

Jorge Garica