EAGLE Central Forums
Where the EAGLE community meets. Sponsored by Stratford Digital.

Home » CadSoft Support Forums » eagle.suggest.eng » Diff bus naming
Diff bus naming [message #167220] Thu, 22 September 2016 11:38 Go to next message
Morten Leikvoll
Messages: 1348
Registered: November 2007
Senior Member
Currently, bus names may contain a single end bus of signal names ending
with the index#, like D[0..7],A[0..15]

However, diff signals needs to end with _P or _N for eagle to detect
them as diff, hence they can not be added to a bus using the index
range. D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N doesnt work. This means, diff buses must be
written with very long names.

I suggest that bus names should at support one of the following, ranging
from simple to complex effort:

1-Index in the middle of the name, such as D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N

2-D[0..7]_[PN] for even more compactness

3-Multiple indexes like D[A..C][0..7]_[PN], in good old regexp style.


Afaics, all of them should be compatible with existing names.
Re: Diff bus naming [message #167222 is a reply to message #167220] Thu, 22 September 2016 12:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chuck Huber
Messages: 600
Registered: October 2004
Senior Member
On 09/22/2016 07:38 AM, Morten Leikvoll wrote:
>
> Currently, bus names may contain a single end bus of signal names
> ending with the index#, like D[0..7],A[0..15]
>
> However, diff signals needs to end with _P or _N for eagle to detect
> them as diff, hence they can not be added to a bus using the index
> range. D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N doesnt work. This means, diff buses must be
> written with very long names.
>
> I suggest that bus names should at support one of the following,
> ranging from simple to complex effort:
>
> 1-Index in the middle of the name, such as D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N

One could use DP[0..7],DN[0..7], or D_P[0..7],D_N[0..7].

>
> 2-D[0..7]_[PN] for even more compactness
>
> 3-Multiple indexes like D[A..C][0..7]_[PN], in good old regexp style.

I see your point, multiple iterators in any position rather than a
single iterator at the end.

Odd that you mention regexps. Every time I type in a bus name index I
use a dash to specify a range, and have to go back and correct it to two
dots. Creatures of habit, I guess.

Jorge, I'm in for this one.
Re: Diff bus naming [message #167223 is a reply to message #167222] Thu, 22 September 2016 12:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Morten Leikvoll
Messages: 1348
Registered: November 2007
Senior Member
On 22.09.2016 14:41, Chuck Huber wrote:
> On 09/22/2016 07:38 AM, Morten Leikvoll wrote:
>>
>> Currently, bus names may contain a single end bus of signal names
>> ending with the index#, like D[0..7],A[0..15]
>>
>> However, diff signals needs to end with _P or _N for eagle to detect
>> them as diff, hence they can not be added to a bus using the index
>> range. D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N doesnt work. This means, diff buses must be
>> written with very long names.
>>
>> I suggest that bus names should at support one of the following,
>> ranging from simple to complex effort:
>>
>> 1-Index in the middle of the name, such as D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N
>
> One could use DP[0..7],DN[0..7], or D_P[0..7],D_N[0..7].

I guess you mean that the diff definition has to change instead of bus
naming definitions. DPn/DNn will not be routed as diff as it is now.
Yes thats an option, to allow something after the P or N.. Or even make
a general regexp for P/N pairs, like "^.*_[PN]$". I think it was
suggested back at the days just before diff pair routing appeared.

>> 2-D[0..7]_[PN] for even more compactness
>>
>> 3-Multiple indexes like D[A..C][0..7]_[PN], in good old regexp style.
>
> I see your point, multiple iterators in any position rather than a
> single iterator at the end.
>
> Odd that you mention regexps. Every time I type in a bus name index I
> use a dash to specify a range, and have to go back and correct it to two
> dots. Creatures of habit, I guess.
>
> Jorge, I'm in for this one.

Regexp could be used more in Eagle. I use the strxstr() often in ULP's.
I would like to see it used for show commands too, but thats for a
different thread.
Re: Diff bus naming [message #167229 is a reply to message #167223] Thu, 22 September 2016 14:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachaelp
Messages: 583
Registered: March 2015
Location: UK
Senior Member
I'll support this suggestion too, I use busses a lot and diff pairs quite often, it would be very nice to be able to have a nice compact notation to specify the diff pairs within a bus. Happy with either option 1 or 2 for this. Option 3 looks like a great idea too, would have to have a think about the possibilities for how the extra flexibility could be used but in general I like all these ideas.
Re: Diff bus naming [message #167256 is a reply to message #167223] Fri, 23 September 2016 15:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chuck Huber
Messages: 600
Registered: October 2004
Senior Member
On 09/22/2016 08:52 AM, Morten Leikvoll wrote:
> On 22.09.2016 14:41, Chuck Huber wrote:
>> On 09/22/2016 07:38 AM, Morten Leikvoll wrote:
>>>
>>> Currently, bus names may contain a single end bus of signal names
>>> ending with the index#, like D[0..7],A[0..15]
>>>
>>> However, diff signals needs to end with _P or _N for eagle to detect
>>> them as diff, hence they can not be added to a bus using the index
>>> range. D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N doesnt work. This means, diff buses must be
>>> written with very long names.
>>>
>>> I suggest that bus names should at support one of the following,
>>> ranging from simple to complex effort:
>>>
>>> 1-Index in the middle of the name, such as D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N
>>
>> One could use DP[0..7],DN[0..7], or D_P[0..7],D_N[0..7].
>
> I guess you mean that the diff definition has to change instead of bus
> naming definitions. DPn/DNn will not be routed as diff as it is now.
> Yes thats an option, to allow something after the P or N.. Or even
> make a general regexp for P/N pairs, like "^.*_[PN]$". I think it was
> suggested back at the days just before diff pair routing appeared.
>
>>> 2-D[0..7]_[PN] for even more compactness
>>>
>>> 3-Multiple indexes like D[A..C][0..7]_[PN], in good old regexp style.
>>
>> I see your point, multiple iterators in any position rather than a
>> single iterator at the end.

Hmmm... So would you want the entire bus to route in the same manner as
a single diff pair routes today (the follow-me routing feature), or
would you prefer to route individual pairs separately?

I kind of like this. An entire bus, differential pairs or not, could be
routed in this manner.

Later,
- Chuck
Re: Diff bus naming [message #167283 is a reply to message #167256] Mon, 26 September 2016 08:06 Go to previous message
Morten Leikvoll
Messages: 1348
Registered: November 2007
Senior Member
On 23.09.2016 17:58, Chuck Huber wrote:
> On 09/22/2016 08:52 AM, Morten Leikvoll wrote:
>> On 22.09.2016 14:41, Chuck Huber wrote:
>>> On 09/22/2016 07:38 AM, Morten Leikvoll wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Currently, bus names may contain a single end bus of signal names
>>>> ending with the index#, like D[0..7],A[0..15]
>>>>
>>>> However, diff signals needs to end with _P or _N for eagle to detect
>>>> them as diff, hence they can not be added to a bus using the index
>>>> range. D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N doesnt work. This means, diff buses must be
>>>> written with very long names.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest that bus names should at support one of the following,
>>>> ranging from simple to complex effort:
>>>>
>>>> 1-Index in the middle of the name, such as D[0..7]_P,D[0..7]_N
>>>
>>> One could use DP[0..7],DN[0..7], or D_P[0..7],D_N[0..7].
>>
>> I guess you mean that the diff definition has to change instead of bus
>> naming definitions. DPn/DNn will not be routed as diff as it is now.
>> Yes thats an option, to allow something after the P or N.. Or even
>> make a general regexp for P/N pairs, like "^.*_[PN]$". I think it was
>> suggested back at the days just before diff pair routing appeared.
>>
>>>> 2-D[0..7]_[PN] for even more compactness
>>>>
>>>> 3-Multiple indexes like D[A..C][0..7]_[PN], in good old regexp style.
>>>
>>> I see your point, multiple iterators in any position rather than a
>>> single iterator at the end.
>
> Hmmm... So would you want the entire bus to route in the same manner as
> a single diff pair routes today (the follow-me routing feature), or
> would you prefer to route individual pairs separately?
>
> I kind of like this. An entire bus, differential pairs or not, could be
> routed in this manner.

I was more on schematic level, but you could suggest bus routing in a
new thread. Sometimes I have missed it, even for single end buses. It
would have to define a way to select multiple airwires for parallel routing.
Previous Topic: How to group objects then select them as a group
Next Topic: set context submenus and spacer
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Jul 29 11:53:12 GMT 2017