Sorting by components description

Is there anyway to sort this? i can’t efficiently navigate components with no sorting, any help is appreciated!

Have you checked in ‘preferences’? There may be an option for sorting components.

I’m not sure which dialog you show.

guessed: Add symbol → symbol chooser.
Bad news: there is currently no selectable sorting available, the items are sorted with the symbol-name.
Moreover I think there is also no open gitlab-issue (as feature-request) for symbol-sorting.
If used wisely the filter-function helps alot to better find the desired symbol.
New feature for v7: you could add additionally columns (selected from your user-defined fields in the symbol-library).

As remark: If there later is a sorting-by-description function your use of non-standard charcters (“µ”) will not help.

1 Like

I have all my symbols in one big-o library and have them named so they alpha-sort nicely. I use a prefix (C- D- J- U- etc) and the data should be ordered major-to-minor (eg: U-current-source-2-term-200mA…)

Though, with v7, life is much nicer with a database, and between the tables-as-libraries feature and database views to filter, I can really organize the way I want.

Edit – oops, I see that you were asking about the description column, and I jumped the gun.

Yes, you are the number 1 or number 2 fan of the data base, which is magnificent! :+1: :+1: :+1:

But, with the normal personal libraries are you aware of this.
For the unwashed, unclean, unconverted, it is worth your mentioning if and when the occasion arises. :grin:

Hmm. Did not realize there was a recommended symbol limit. It must not be a hard-and-fast rule as I see that I have 421 symbols in my main lib. I cannot say that anything has ever seemed sluggish in loading or using it. Yes, it was a bit long to scroll through in the old v6 days, but not unwieldy. Now, with the database (did I mention that I am a fan?) I have it grouped into a dozen tables which does make it much faster to find what I need. I could have broken the original lib up in a similar fashion, and I still can I suppose (after breaking up the main lib it is just some find/replace tweaks to the database symbol fields, which would be easy one table at a time). I should probably do that one of these days. Just pulling connectors and ICs into their own libs would probably be enough.
Thx @jmk

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.