Re: θ Symbol Name
Katerine Aldrige
Typographical symbols and punctuation marks are marks and symbols used in typography with a variety of purposes such as to help with legibility and accessibility, or to identify special cases. This list gives those most commonly encountered with Latin script. For a far more comprehensive list of symbols and signs, see List of Unicode characters. For other languages and symbol sets (especially in mathematics and science), see below
IMO, what may benefit from a few little improvements is the way we can search and select the elements in the libraries. Namely : the library browser.
The impact on the current official libraries is nil, but improvements would become easy.
Try Linux, works like a charm on older PCs (if this is the reason for Win 7).
Some live USB keys allows persistent storage, alleviating the need for HD space and or formatting.
This may be your Kicad 5.99 key (once installed
This article explains creating a persistent live USB with Ubuntu (and flavors like Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Ubuntu MATE, etc.), Linux Mint, Debian or elementary OS (it should work with any Debian or Ubuntu based Linux distribution) using mkusb.
Rufus 3.7 beta, released yesterday, has finalized the persistent partition support for Debian and Ubuntu, allowing users to create persistent storage live USBs of recent Debian Live ISOs, and Ubuntu Live ISOs created after 1st of August, 2019.
I agree with @pmx. The fact that component name and value name must be the same, cause many difficult in library organization: how do you would name for example different capacitors with the same value? Example:
Edit: And to be frank I can and probably will keep it that way. This just means that I will probably not start using the SPICE functionality in Eeschema, which is a pity. Or I have to work around it in SPICE. The only problem being that my Value fields are part numbers and not values.
The drawback of these work arounds (apart from the work needed to be done and the risk of doing it wrong) is that when adding components to the schematic the components are no longer sorted by their part number, but on a value. I would then have to write the part number to a third (or forth if you count Name and Value as separate), namely to the beginning of the Description.
Inside my visual studio code it says that it can build the object and link the shared library correctly, and it also changed from C to CXX in the output and gives me no errors even though some code is c++ only.
Functions are named the same. Linker doesn't see the C++ source, but it still has to differentiate between the two functions to link with them. So C++ compiler "mangles" the function names, so that linker can differentiate between them. For big simplicity it could look like:
The rules of name mangling are complicated, to make the names as short as possible. They have to take into account any number of templates, arguments, objects, names, qualifers, lambdas, overloads, operators etc. and generate an unique name and they have to use only characters that are compatible with the linker on a specific architecture. For example here is a reference for name mangling used by gnu g++ compiler.
Thank You very much for the detailled answer. I now understand the issue.After a quick search I found a solution for my problem. Encapsulating the function prototypes like this avoids the name mangling.
Since you want to draw a wire you might need to do some additional checking to figure out the location of the pins on the symbol if they aren't in a fixed side of the symbol based on pin type. You could find the bounding box of the symbol (assuming one exists) and determine which part of the symbol each pin occurs based on the coordinates of the bounding box.
Why are some relocation entries in an ELF file symbol name + addend while others are section + addend? I am looking to clear up some confusion and gain a deeper understanding of ELFs. Below is my investigation.
If I don't make the functions static and then look at the relocations, I see the same as before when the type is R_X86_64_64, but I also see entries that use the symbol name plus an addend with type R_X86_64_PC32. So for example in .rela.text:
The function names for static functions are not guaranteed to be present at link time. You could remove them with e.g. objcopy --strip-unneeded or objcopy --strip-symbol, and the result will still link.
I believe the only reason they are kept is to help debugging, and they are not used by the linker at all. But I have not verified this by looking at linker source, and so did not answer this related question.
In short, however, when ml_util_func is global, it may be overridden in the executable or another shared library, so when linking our shared library, the linker can't just assume the offset is known and hard-code it [12]. It makes all references to global symbols relocatable in order to allow the dynamic loader to decide how to resolve them. This is why declaring the function static makes a difference - since it's no longer global or exported, the linker can hard-code its offset in the code.
We must not include windows.h or winnt.h to .rc file - this headers - for are for c/c++ compilers and not designed for RC (resource compiler which process .rc file). as result if we include such files we may get errors.
All standard windows definitions, which we need/use in rc file - exist in winres.h (and it subincludes). From another side in it no extra symbols/definitions wich exist in windows.h - it's not needed for rc and some time can cause errors.
I have run into this complaint rc2247 when trying to edit the rc file in a project compiled in vs2010. This had been upgraded from vs2050. I found that if I chose to open the .sin file via 'version selector' instead of going straight to vs2010, then it still opens in vs2010 but there is no problem in editing the rc. I don't pretend to understand !CalendarMan
Is it possible to move a pin's name in the symbol editor. For instance, if you were drawing an LM317 symbol and wanted the In, Out, and Adj to appear outside of the body of the symbol rather than inside of it, could you do this without simply creating separate text files? Is there a way to reposition these? If not, then I know I can just use the text tool. Just curious about that.
I'm also curious if it's possible to give the pins a different name/number. For example if you were using an LM317 in an SO8 package, the In would be Pin 1, the Out would be Pin 2, and the Adj would be Pin 4. I know you can assign this in the Device rather than the symbol but I do like it when my Symbols match my Packages pin numbering-wise.
Thanks for your participation. The pin text is not moveable, so as you have already mentioned what you have to do make the pin text invisible using the properties and then using the TEXT command add in your own text.
In the symbol the pins will only show the pin name, once you go into the device EAGLE will reflect the pad numbers on the symbol automatically, again the pad text are not user modifiable. Depending on the package variant in the device the Pad numbers will update automatically so for different packages you'll get different pad numbers on the symbol.
I suppose I'm making a futile effort to use Eagle the way I used CircuitMaker/Altium of which I'm far more familiar with. To me, the way that Altium handles this situation seems to be the more appropriate way but I could definitely see somebody disagreeing with me on this point and suggesting the way EAGLE handles it is the more appropriate way.
Kudos are much appreciated if the information I have shared is helpful to you and/or others.
Did this resolve your issue? Please accept it "As a Solution" so others may benefit from it.
I completely agree with C.Nicks on this one. Making the symbol 'smashable' would go a long way in making things neat and tidy. One of the risks with the current method is that you need to be very careful when you are labeling the pins, otherwise you could completely screw up your schematic.
For example, in the example above with the LM317, what if when I went to add text to the symbol, I accidentally put the "In" text on the Out pin and put the "Out" text on the In pin. Then when I did my layout I wired it up according to what I labeled everything, I'd have a bad circuit and would be struggling to troubleshoot it. If we could Smash the symbol instead, then the risk of labeling the pins wrong would be virtually eliminated.
Totally agree. You get an Upvote from the dev team. We'll get this on the list of stuff for us to implement. We are doing a lot of work on libraries at the moment but of course this takes some serious care to not screw up people's existing content. We'll look to get this capability scheduled and try and implement this in a future release. No promises yet on when we do it, but it's something we need to do anyway to support importing libraries from other systems, so we'll have a look at it.
I found and modified a useful ULP last night that essentially mimicks smashing the symbol pins. It only works on the pin name and not the pad, but it may be useful to someone.
You can easily change the text size/ratio, location, and pin visibility by editing the file.
Just to add my frustration at not being able to do this. I've used several schematic packages (Mentor Design Architect, Cadence Capture, Proteus) over the years and Eagle is the only one that makes this simple task so difficult. It was excusable when Eagle was 70 for a perpetual license, but we are now paying 500 per year per seat for a Premium licence (which is only slightly less than Cadence). Would be nice if this could be bumped up the priority list.
Same here. I'm just starting to us Fusion 360 Electronic Designer. I come from the land of Altium and DipTrace. Not being able to move the name really makes for a lousy experience. Hiding and adding text is way more likely to result in me naming something improperly and ending up with a bad design. Please fix this.
d3342ee215