[gta02-core] KiCad wish list

Rene Harder rehar at saweb.de
Tue Jun 16 07:27:51 CEST 2009

Álvaro Lopes wrote:
> As a side note, that component is (despite being called "digital") still a transistor, so there's no actual IN/OUT/GND involved [1]. Stupid those for the
> I/O/GND nomenclature. We should avoid using IN/OUT on components where its function may vary according to the design. I actually prefer a 3-passive-pins for
> transistors - actually if we ever need a discrete constant-current design like this one [2] we don't want them surely hardcoded as in/out.
I'm not quite sure if i understand you right. Are you talking about the
pin labels (BCE) or the pin type (IN/OUT/PASSIVE/PWR OUT etc.) or both?

If you mean the pin type then I agree. When i checked the symbol I was
wondering if that might be a problem but then i checked other kicad
transistor designs they all define B as input, C and E passive. (is the
same for our EMH4 symbol).
I thought passive for all pins would be the right type for exactly the
same reason if you use a transistor with a grounded base. In general
this configuration may not be very common, rf-circuits are a different
story though.

More information about the gta02-core mailing list