Hi there,
i just want to say that i’m starting the work on making the 74xgxx.lib KCL-compliant.
Best regards,
Fabian
1 Like
I guess firstly, why? Are there any actual issues with the lib apart from KLC?
I looked at 74xGxx, and while every component fails KLC in some way, the components look great and well implemented with useful data, an excellent job. Apart from the power pins, there is nothing I would change there.
The KLC regularly changes, so the lib may well have been compliant before. Like other format checkers (lint etc), there is a danger that making data compliant to a spec becomes a box ticking exercise, and does not lead to real improvement in quality. Following all the KLC rules to the letter can lead to nonsensical stuff, like forcing all pins to be on 100 mil grid when it is better that the symbol is compact.
I think I would prefer the KLC to adapt better to specific cases, rather than the one size fits all approach. The KLC is a guide, not an end in itself.
There also seems to be problem is that we keep reworking already good existing libraries to meet the moving goal-posts, rather than improving the quality of the really poor libraries, or catching up with the huge backlog of pull requests.
1 Like
Well said.
All contributions to the library are reviewed by us librarians. If you can state a reason of why a specific contribution of yours violates a rule, we will accept it. In the worst case it will lead to a lengthy discussion about the specific rule.
Invisible power pins are not only a KLC violation but restrict the usecases for the symbols. They can not be used in any system that uses more than one power supply.
As I said…
> Apart from the power pins, there is nothing I would change there.
Okay, no worries, i will stop it.
I’m just a little bit too motivate i guess 