Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

[email protected] (Matthew Needes (LANL)) · Tue, 20 Jun 1995 14:50:51 -0500

>Matt wrote:
>>
>> Part of the advantage of having more information on the schematic is that
>> you have more information at your fingertips while browsing a design.
>>
>> A flat list of hierarchical substitution rules may or may not make much
>> sense until you compare them with your design anyway.  Why not just put
>> the rules on the schematic ?
>
>  I don't see the advantage. All we want to see is the design of one
>RF cavity, for instance, NOT which cavity. In fact, it has at least one
>advantage to not have the rule information on the schematic. Say, if
>we want to generate a new database from a design for a new cavity,
>we don't have to go in to Capfast to adjust the rules which is
>nothing to do with the design. All we need to do is to adjust the
>rule files or OODB.

My solution for having multiple instances of a cavity, power supply, or
any other device is to simply instantiate as many as you need from a
higher level of the schematic hierarchy.  If you are worried about
instantiating 100 cavities on one schematic page, that is not a problem,
just instantiate 10 blocks of 10 cavities each.  If handling this repetition
is a problem, you can use "set" properties to distinguish between the blocks
on instances.

The fact is that both techniques can exist side by side, depending on both
requirements and individual taste.  I'm not terribly opposed to the post-processing
of schematics, but hierarchical substitution has benefits other than just
record naming.

Matt

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System