Hierarchical PDF-printing with Mentor "IC Station Schematics"?

[Joerg]

Jim Thompson wrote:
[...]


IME legacy software from many companies is generally better than the new
stuff.
Crapture was last "good" when it ran under DOS. I even used it back
then

See? That's what I was saying all along
And what have I been saying all along ?

But you keep chanting that PSpice is the problem, when it isn't.

Then how do you explain the PSpice COM wrapper error? LTSpice doesn't
have those kinds of errors.

That "wrapper" is the link <=> Crapture, not PSpice crashing.

Then why does the crash notice say PSpice on it, and not Capture?

 

[[email protected]]

Jim Thompson wrote:
[email protected] wrote:

[snip]
LTSpice is free and Cadsoft never needed life support for Eagle. It just
works, does not crash and does not cost an arm and a leg. So that's what
I am using.
Doesn't do hierarchy, either.

I know, but word on the street is that version 6 will have it and is due
out as beta soon. Anyhow, my main concern with SW is crashes and Eagle
doesn't do those. To me quality matter most, not features. With pretty
much everything.


[snip]

Really! Hierarchical schematics is an absolute necessity to do IC
designs.

I know. Even for board level stuff it is. Took a few years to convince
Cadsoft. The sad thing is all the money that they have left on the table
because large companies can't use a CAD sans hierarchy.

Now why on earth is Mentor IC Station Schematic unable to print out a
complete hierarchy? That's what the guys at the IC house told me.

I don't think Crapture can print a hierarchical stack either. I know
PSpice Schematics can't directly.

When I designed large chunks for ultrasound machine (in the days before
DSPs took over much of that) I had to print out complete stacks a lot
and can't remember that it ever was a problem with Orcad SDT. So they
broke that as well? Oh man ...

I haven't figured out how to do it in 16.3 either. It's not that big of a
deal, though. I make all the refids the same except for the first digit, then
include a translation table for those who can't add 100. ;-)

 

[[email protected]]

No, I never said it'll be there before version 6. Many moons ago I was
hoping version 5 would have it but one question to them dashed that
hope. So I just sat out this release.

Ok, you've been dreaming about hierarchy for many iterations of 'S'. ;-)

Nah, I wait for Eagle 6.0. If it introduces the hierarchy and they don't
screw up the quality (as in no crashes) it'll be as close to perfect as
CAD can get.

I'm forced to set my sights lower. Crapture is at least usable now. ;-)

So would that make it a Castro-Chevy?

Rather than an Obama-Chevy? I suppose. ;-)

The experience friends had with "socialist editions" of Western cars was
rather checkered. In Europe this happened a lot. Polski-Fiat, Lada, and
so on. Those cars rusted fast and broke down a lot. Ok, they were cheap.

Well, look at what they started with.

 

[Joerg]

Jim Thompson wrote:
[email protected] wrote:

[snip]
LTSpice is free and Cadsoft never needed life support for Eagle. It just
works, does not crash and does not cost an arm and a leg. So that's what
I am using.
Doesn't do hierarchy, either.

I know, but word on the street is that version 6 will have it and is due
out as beta soon. Anyhow, my main concern with SW is crashes and Eagle
doesn't do those. To me quality matter most, not features. With pretty
much everything.


[snip]

Really! Hierarchical schematics is an absolute necessity to do IC
designs.

I know. Even for board level stuff it is. Took a few years to convince
Cadsoft. The sad thing is all the money that they have left on the table
because large companies can't use a CAD sans hierarchy.

Now why on earth is Mentor IC Station Schematic unable to print out a
complete hierarchy? That's what the guys at the IC house told me.
I don't think Crapture can print a hierarchical stack either. I know
PSpice Schematics can't directly.

When I designed large chunks for ultrasound machine (in the days before
DSPs took over much of that) I had to print out complete stacks a lot
and can't remember that it ever was a problem with Orcad SDT. So they
broke that as well? Oh man ...

Though you've tweaked my imagination. PSpice Schematics are purely
text format like those from LTspice. So it should be possible to
write a script or a batch file (remember those ? to print out the
hierarchical stack.

Actually, that's the beauty of Eagle. You can write yourself a user
language program that does just about anything. If PSpice has similar
scripting capabilities it should be possible.

Now making labels, designators and attributes searchable, that's another
matter. That would need a time machine that takes us back to the good
old days ;-)

My PSpice stuff IS searchable, so no problem here, though I have
little need for searching for a REFDES... my layout guy works from the
schematics then checks his layout netlist against my schematic netlist
(LVS)... hard to make an error when the _checks_ don't include the
human inclination to make mistakes.

Different in my case. We have most of the chip designed by a design
house, I did the architecture and together with my client's engineer we
watch that it's all done per our spec. For example, it is really
important to be able to search and verify that some control signal goes
to all the places we want it to go.

For reviews I tend toward navigable (and searchable) PDF's...

http://analog-innovations.com/SED/Sample_SCH_Navigable.pdf

Nice, even finds the vertical stuff such as POLY0. That just plain does
not work with Mentor IC Station. What kind of font did you set in PSpice
Schematics?

I tried PowerPoint, but found it too much effort, Adobe Acrobat is so
much easier.

Acrobat 9 (paid edition) failed quite miserably on a schematic with
vector font. It only OCR'ed about half of the stuff correctly and also
missed the vertical text :-(

 

[Joerg]

[snip]
My PSpice stuff IS searchable, so no problem here, though I have
little need for searching for a REFDES... my layout guy works from the
schematics then checks his layout netlist against my schematic netlist
(LVS)... hard to make an error when the _checks_ don't include the
human inclination to make mistakes.

Different in my case. We have most of the chip designed by a design
house, I did the architecture and together with my client's engineer we
watch that it's all done per our spec. For example, it is really
important to be able to search and verify that some control signal goes
to all the places we want it to go.

That's NOT my style... checking work hired-out by looking over a
schematic is dangerous. Can't you run the their schematics in a
simulator to check them?

Yes, we can. But I want to do both. This stuff is rather difficult to
simulate, it's highly mixed signal. Can take forever unless you go
behavioral with some modeling and we both know that that can get you
onto thin ice.

We have caught a few things via schematic review already and that's
quite normal with projects like this. It just takes too friggin' long
without a searchable hierarchy.

Arial, various sizes depending on location.

Ok, will check whether IC Station can do that. But we'll likely still
need somthing better than Acrobat because what comes out of this Mentor
CAD is supposedly non-searchable.

[...]

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Maybe, but they _do_ have to know how to install any manner of software
that says, "see your network administrator."

Usually that has to do with setting up servers for floating licenses
and that sort of thing. Not a problem for those who are not doing
anything that requires high-end software.

That was kind of a challenge for me for awhile, when I was the network
administrator - I had to figure it out for myself. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

They usually have very good instructions and/or help. They don't want
to p*ss off the network admins or make them look bad. They also keep
those instructions away from the end users.

Try installing an IP phone network in a non-stand-alone mode, for
example.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Charlie E.]

Jim Thompson wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:
[...]


IME legacy software from many companies is generally better than the new
stuff.
Crapture was last "good" when it ran under DOS. I even used it back
then

See? That's what I was saying all along
And what have I been saying all along ?

But you keep chanting that PSpice is the problem, when it isn't.

Then how do you explain the PSpice COM wrapper error? LTSpice doesn't
have those kinds of errors.

That "wrapper" is the link <=> Crapture, not PSpice crashing.

Then why does the crash notice say PSpice on it, and not Capture?

The PSpice COM wrapper is what Crapture use to "talk" to PSpice. The
Crapture "developers" did not have the brains to modify what existed
with PSpice Schematics. In general I'd say that the Crapture
"developers" just threw it together... low $$$ expended, then sent it
all to India for "support" ;-)

...Jim Thompson

I don't want to talk about it... ;-)

Charlie

 

[josephkk]

Good God, you can be a dumbass... I don't know if I'm going to need the
Xilinx toolchain next week or the Actel. No, they didn't even install the
Altera tools on my machine. Go figure.

Not me that is the dumbass, as to installing those specific toolchains or
big ticket items it is your IT department that is dumbass. Maybe your IT
people (management) are that bad.

Even more proof that your brain is gone. You can't even read.

So speaks the illiterate.

 

[josephkk]

With LTSpice, how many are writing that check? Crapture has been on life
support for going on two decades.


Oh, I thought you were talking about a *real* car. Try getting a '57 Chevy
from Cuba. ;-)

Not talking about reality any more?

?-(

 

[josephkk]

Doesn't do hierarchy, either.


I wasn't talking about 54 year old ones. ;-)

Yeah right. As if a non-grandfathered one would be legal. Oh wait, it
would be NOTHING like the original under the hood.

?-(

 

[josephkk]

[email protected] wrote:
[snip]
LTSpice is free and Cadsoft never needed life support for Eagle. Itjust
works, does not crash and does not cost an arm and a leg. So that'swhat
I am using.

Doesn't do hierarchy, either.


I know, but word on the street is that version 6 will have it and is due
out as beta soon. Anyhow, my main concern with SW is crashes and Eagle
doesn't do those. To me quality matter most, not features. With pretty
much everything.

[snip]

Really! Hierarchical schematics is an absolute necessity to do IC
designs.

I have a hard time convincing people of that. They seen no use for hierarchy.
Some even do VHDL flat(ish)!

Point them to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mead_&_Conway_revolution

?-)

 

[[email protected]]

Yeah right. As if a non-grandfathered one would be legal. Oh wait, it
would be NOTHING like the original under the hood.

Having trouble following along today, JKK?