It would be nice if the desired nets to be used for routing differential signals could be selected, instead of forcing a naming convention on the pair. I like to prefix the MCU port pin number in the label (see below), which makes the labels incompatible with the differential routing tool.
My experience is that adding such redundancy in names around your project (both Schematic / PCB layout, writing software, documentation, etc) creates a maintenance nightmare. Documentation gets out of sync when you for example change the microcontroller or want to use parts of a project for another project. And when parts get out of sync, it becomes far more likely to make errors.
So, in my opinion you would be better off by unlearning this bad habit than with attempting to get this implemented in KiCad. (although having the ability to create a pair out of arbitrary signal names can be useful).
I guess that in the long term, support for routing a bundle of signals such as a databus may get implemented. This would also benefit from a more generic naming convention. When I look at the naming required for differential pairs, it looks like something that was “easy to implement for getting a start with differential signal routing” and that it may change in later revisions. There is no lack of ideas for improving KiCad. The main problem is availability of hours for the KiCad developers.
If this is important to your workflow, consider giving this issue a “thumbs up”:
While popularity does not guarantee implementation, it definitely doesn’t hurt. At the moment though, this wishlist item has no one assigned to it and no milestone so it is quite unlikely to be included in v9.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.