gEDA-dev: Broken slotting

[Steve Meier]

I have been violating the rule "All pins must have a pinseq=# attribute
attached to the pin object. " regularily. I reason, that if a device has
only one gate then no slot list is needed. Now I wonder if the slot list
is needed for spice?

Thanks,

Steve Meier

Ales Hvezda wrote:
>> Thanks for confirming the desired behaviour. I was (and still am) a
>> little concerned about not having any "contractual" guarantee that every
>> symbol will have pinseq attributes start at "1" and end at the number of
>> pins on the device. Perhaps this is implied though, by the nature of the
>>     
>
>   
>> slotdef attribute.
>>     
>
> From: http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:master_attributes_list#pinseq
>
> ...
> pinseq
>
> This attribute is used to give each pin an unique number or sequence. All pins 
> must have a pinseq=# attribute attached to the pin object. This attribute 
> should be hidden. This attribute is used extensively by gschem and gnetlist.
> In some backends (especially the SPICE backend), gnetlist will output pins in 
> the order of increasing pin sequence. The sequence numbers start at 1 and 
> should increase without skipping any numbers. This attribute is not the pin 
> number (i.e. device pin numbers, like GND is 7 on TTL). For pin numbers see 
> the pinnumber attribute.
> Examples: pinseq=1 pinseq=2 pinseq=3
>
> This attribute replaces the obsolete pin#=# attribute.
> ...
>
> Random question, obviously this slipped by me, but there is code that is 
> changing the pinseq= number on the fly?  That doesn't seem right to me.
> I always assumed pinseq= would stay constant.
>
> -Ales
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-dev mailing list
> geda-dev at moria.seul.org
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
>
>