[HN Gopher] Real-time Netlisting in KiCad [video]
___________________________________________________________________
Real-time Netlisting in KiCad [video]
Author : teleforce
Score : 70 points
Date : 2021-06-02 11:30 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (fosdem.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (fosdem.org)
| mastax wrote:
| I've been using KiCad professionally for 2 years, and I'm pretty
| happy with it. I made a token effort to try some commercial
| offerings but at this point the transition cost seems higher than
| the benefit for the mid-range boards I'm making. Would likely be
| different if I were laying out big FPGAs with RF and DDR5.
|
| I'm really looking forward to KiCad 6. Tried the nightlies and
| the UI improvements and all the little changes are really
| impressive. Was tempted to switch my work over to it but was
| scared of the inability to convert projects back to the KiCad 5
| format.
|
| My one major complaint coming from a software background is poor
| support for version control. KiCad is closer than most to working
| with standard tools due to its structured textual data formats.
| However the structures in the files are ordered by comparing the
| objects pointers so every time you launch KiCad and save it
| randomizes the order of everything causing massive spurious
| diffs. I've seen some people use pre-commit hooks and perl/sed
| scripts to try to fix the diffs but could never get them to work.
| I've been meaning to contribute a better sorting system but the
| prospect of building 30 C++ libraries from scratch on Windows
| triggered PTSD flashbacks.
|
| In the mean time I've been using cadlab.io which is a GitHub-like
| for ECAD. It can make visual diffs of changes which is quite
| nice. It can be slow, though, and it has a weird rendering bug on
| Firefox that makes everything blurry sometimes.
| dbrgn wrote:
| Maybe give https://librepcb.org/ a try? The file format is
| optimized for version control. While it isn't yet as feature-
| rich as KiCAD yet (e.g. no differential pair length matching,
| no 3D preview) it tries to do better in terms of usability and
| library file format.
|
| (Disclaimer: I'm a contributor)
| zibzab wrote:
| I really like the simplicity of librepcb. For small projects
| I prefer using librepcb over kicad.
|
| There is however no question that kicad has the mindshare and
| is moving at a much faster pace.
| [deleted]
| wrgrtlk wrote:
| Fauci is a fraudulent fascist fuck.
| wrgrtlk wrote:
| Fauci needs to be KILLED.
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
|
| KILL FAUCI!
| seddona wrote:
| Very useful feature. KiCAD is rapidly becoming feasible for use
| in a professional setting.
| bbernhard90 wrote:
| Does anyone have any experience with Horizon EDA?
| https://github.com/horizon-eda/horizon
|
| Two days ago version 2.0 of Horizon EDA was released. I haven't
| tried it yet, but I've watched some Youtube/twitch Videos about
| it and I've to admit I am really impressed. It has some really
| nice convenience features - and the way it handles libraries is
| much nicer than the way Kicad does.
|
| The only thing that's holding me back is, that it's basically a
| one man show. Although the project already exists for several
| years there's always the fear that the author at some point
| abandons the project. I really wish there would be some sort of
| semi automated conversion tool which allows me to convert Kicad
| projects to Horizon EDA.
| Scene_Cast2 wrote:
| Here's the KiCad 6 roadmap & feature set, if anyone is curious
| about new KiCad features:
| https://techexplorations.com/blog/kicad/kicad-6-review-new-a...
| jmiskovic wrote:
| Amazing article! I love keeping tabs on KiCad growth even if I
| don't use it anymore. It was already perfect tool for small
| projects some 5 years ago.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Just a general comment on KiCAD.
|
| I'm honestly impressed that for my applications they have reached
| feature parity with EAGLE and Altium, both of which are $10k+ per
| license.
|
| In my opinion their GUI still needs beauty and readability
| improvements, but they can somewhat compensate by having a great
| print preview and PDF export. I'm trying to lobby them towards
| supporting a wider selection of fonts, but that'll realistically
| take a year to arrive.
|
| But where KiCAD really shines is compatibility. I was feeling
| rather grumpy after Altium priced me out of being able to open my
| old design files. But KiCAD could import them almost flawlessly.
| The only thing I needed to do by hand was to type in clearance
| constraint rules.
|
| Export to Gerber and fab also worked as expected. Plus their
| community forum is like 1000x more lively than the beginner
| forums for Altium and EAGLE.
| madengr wrote:
| I'm still paying for Altium. Last time I tried KiCAD I couldn't
| assign a net to arbitrary polygons, which is critical for RF
| work. It still has a ways to go to catch up with Altium, which
| is $2k/year maintenance.
| OJFord wrote:
| Eagle is now Fusion360, and so free for non-commercial or $10k
| would buy you more than 10y of subscription, I suppose that's
| debatable whether it's more or less than $10k for one-off
| perpetual licence, but I suppose I'd suggest if you were paying
| that much for software you probably also need it newer than 10y
| old and would've spent it again on a newer version?
| tjoff wrote:
| You say that as if it a good thing. As a non-commercial user
| of cad-tools I avoid fusion 360 like the plague.
|
| Now if they had charged a reasonable amount for a license I'd
| pay but now I see it as a net loss for society. The only goal
| it serves is to squasch competition and free software.
| OJFord wrote:
| I just say it as if I consider it positioned _between_
| KiCad & Altium.
|
| I'd like to avoid F360, but for 3D modelling it just seems
| so far ahead of FreeCAD, which still has the frustrations I
| have with F360 as someone used to working with git anyway;
| really I just want to learn OpenSCAD or similar well
| enough.
| phkahler wrote:
| >> I'd like to avoid F360, but for 3D modelling it just
| seems so far ahead of FreeCAD, which still has the
| frustrations I have with F360 as someone used to working
| with git anyway; really I just want to learn OpenSCAD or
| similar well enough.
|
| For MCAD give SolveSpace a try - https://solvespace.com/
| redis_mlc wrote:
| 1) Eagle Premium is a $495/year AutoDesk subscription. (There's
| a Standard version for $100/year for small boards.)
|
| 2) Both Altium and Eagle have nice component libraries, which
| KiCad has a lot of work to improve.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| Software quality and component library quality are a bit of a
| chicken-and-egg problem, Kicad's editors are popular enough
| and good enough that major vendors (like Digikey [1] and
| SnapEDA [2]) are offering Kicad footprints for products.
|
| [1]: https://github.com/Digi-Key/digikey-kicad-library [2]:
| https://www.snapeda.com/
| zibzab wrote:
| Kicads problem is not quantity but quality.
|
| There are too many low quality and duplicate models in the
| standard library.
| elcritch wrote:
| Not to mention supported by PCBA vendors like MacroFab and
| CircuitHub! It's awesome to be able to upload 2-3 files and
| have it all auto-generate the PCB's and find the parts.
| duped wrote:
| Does anyone use these in production? I thought most
| companies of scale had dedicated teams or individuals to
| act as component librarians because the publicly available
| footprints are so bad.
| techdragon wrote:
| KiCAD has good compatibility with a very small number of file
| formats. It needs a LOT of long term work to expand this
| capabilities.
|
| There are dozens of poorly documented EDA project formats and
| unfortunately they are usually associated with expensive
| software. And KiCAD has little support for many of them.
|
| For instance I most recently came across OrCAD, yet another EDA
| tool I have never even heard about it before, it's proprietary
| format locking away design information and thus requiring
| tedious and error prone reconstruction of what is otherwise a
| completely open design.
|
| I'll compare it to Blender, where the support for all but the
| most ludicrously esoteric formats has been developed and in
| many cases is still maintained. Sometimes even better than the
| original tools for the formats were. Blender has done an
| excellent job of supporting otherwise proprietary formats
| originally developed for and used by software with a median
| cost in excess of $1000USD (if not that price per year in some
| cases).
|
| I don't expect parity, I'm aware of the challenges and
| appreciate both the complexity and even the difficulty of
| getting hold of these files in the first place for reverse
| engineering. However to call KiCAD's support for EDA file
| formats in general "excellent" feels disingenuous. It has
| excellent support for a few of the most popular formats and
| very patchy support beyond that.
| etimberg wrote:
| Some of the EDA file formats are absolutely terrible. My
| first job out of school was building
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NI_Multisim . As I recall, the
| file format was quite bad and I doubt anyone would be able to
| figure out what it meant without sitting in front of the
| tool, generating a file, then inspecting it.
| ameminator wrote:
| The Cadence suite of EDA tools (of which OrCAD is one of) is
| surprisingly popular, but more for its silicon-level and
| SPICE simulation capabilities. So it seems to be something
| that should be added to the list, in terms of features for
| KiCAD...
| bfrog wrote:
| Basically kicad is great, until you need huge BGA packages, high
| speed bus traces, or DDR with its insane number of address/data
| lines that require some RF like thinking in design.
|
| The only real other option is Altium these days, which is like
| $10k as others have said. Maybe $7k if you really haggle.
| anfilt wrote:
| I would say huge BGA packages are not much of a problem. KiCAD
| is plenty cable for laying out such a board and all the layers
| such dense chips require.
|
| Its more of an issue of high speed designs, you cant easily put
| a layout into a simulator or have it even simply just calculate
| impedance of a trace automatically as you try and place them.
| Instead you must manual put these details into a calculator.
| Its things like this that really slow down working on a complex
| design. Although, large BGAs generally imply some sort high
| speed elements in a design so equating packages with needed
| features is not unreasonable.
|
| Also component library management could be better.
|
| Although, for simple to moderate designs its definitely
| starting to give other professional software a run for their
| money.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-03 23:02 UTC)