??? 03/13/07 19:57 Read: times |
#134907 - I have to agree ... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Yes, it is a matter of personal preference.
However, I find that busses tend to make the schematic more "busy" and thereby make it harder to read. If the busses were labelled properly, i.e. contained the names of all the signals on them, it would help, though. Having yet another fat line running around the sheet doesn't inherently contribute any information. The "FIND" (net-sniffer) command in most schematic editors allows you to verify that the signals go where they should and are not misspelled. If they are misspelled, attaching them to a fat line doesn't fix anything, and most schematic editors don't even complain when you do that. My preference is to leave out whatever I can. That way there's room for what's essential. RE |
Topic | Author | Date |
8051 board somewhat working | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Give us a clue then.How does it partialy work?? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
HC AC ???? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you will most likely need pullups | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
pull ups | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
be more specific | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
interesting tests | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
interesting they may be, but | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
to verify | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
interesting they may be, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Checksum? CRC? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
hmm | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
You probably need an oscilloscope | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
sorry for asking | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
not the first... (or last :-) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Maybe my naging helped ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
why EPP? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
why epp can be faster | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Epp requires a bit less logic and is WAY faster | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
about that schematic ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
a matter of taste | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I have to agree ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you may not have discovered this![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you have to investigate | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
indeed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Amazed! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What? | 01/01/70 00:00 |