Precisely that. But for this to work we need tools that allow it to be done so. All those I’ve seen being used in professional environment do. I’d be happy seeing KiCAD follow the path too.
How is this not possible in kicad? Just insert a hierarchical sheet.
1 Like
Adding sheet is surely possible. Problem is with placing there [some] things we talked about because the components in the library have (had?) supply pins either visible or invisible but still tied to the [main] symbol.
Well for single unit symbols it does not make sense to separate out the power pins. (At least not in the official lib)
You are always free to copy the symbols into your personal lib and extract the power pins to a separate unit.
Yes i know in your case the offical symbol will then be of less use to you. But if we adopt your rule, a lot of other people will complain for sure.
There will never be a consensus among all users. (The official lib will always be some sort of compromise. Like with a lot of things, one “size” might not fit everyone. As long as it is not truly one size fits no one we are happy.)
First of all I think this is still far less important than the fact that one can currently produce a non-working board with no obvious ERC errors being raised. As I wrote earlier - that’s what brought me to this topic here. The clutter part is - while IMHO still something that will have to be addressed sooner or later - an order of magnitude less “scary”.
It depends on the component but virtually every integrated circuit has two - let’s call them in a momentary lack of a better word - properties: function(s) and supplies. That applies to virtually all ICs, not only the multi-unit ones. Those are in fact separate things regardless of whether the chip is a single or multi-unit type. So it does make some sense IMHO. Especially that the latter is a prerequisite to any of the former being able to fulfil any duty.
I don’t really see it as “my rule”. I find it rather being something that I see on professionally made schematics for decades already and it doesn’t seem to be a fashion of the moment so there probably is something about it. It may be one of those less important things that will have to be improved in order for KiCAD to be allowed to play in the first league. OTOH I fully agree with you that there is no way to change something like that and have everyone happy about it!
Having said that - there is a way that can make it easier for everyone as it seems to combine the best of both approaches and you seem to understand it very well: the supply “units” can be designed in a way that they can be placed inside the “main” symbol if someone wants them there. Obviously the main symbol must follow specified design too. But this is doable and - again IMHO - much better than current “invisible power pins”. Both sides can have what they want: power pins on a separate sheet - here you are. Power pins in the main symbol - here you are. Both are a click away. That is a relatively small change - instead of having to explicitly “make power pins visible” one has to explicitly “place the power unit(s) on the schematic”. Win-win, isn’t it?
1 Like
About the missing erc warning:
This should be reported as a bug. (if it is not already in the bug tracker)
I think better erc is one of the goals of future kicad versions, but i’m not really sure what this better erc will provide.
Maybe the new symbol specification could include something like a “placing this unit is mandatory” flag. (If you are interested in this, get in touch with the developers. Either via the mailing list or via the bug tracker)
About your idea for the power pins always being separated: I would wait for the better erc. New (unexperienced) users might forget to add the power unit to their schematic. If erc does not warn about this, this will lead to a very bad experience for them.
For experienced users it is really not a big problem to change the symbols for their own personal use.
For multi unit symbols i would say we should really make the power pins on a separated unit.