Roy J. Gromlich wrote:
> On the other hand, PADs has one very nice feature which I really
> miss in Eagle - it can scan the schematic file and the PCB file and
> produce a list of differences, and then allow you to resolve those
> individually (if you want) in either direction.  That is, make the PCB
> match the schematic for some items and the schematic match the
> PCB for others.  Or change both simultaneously.

Eagle handles this in a better way, in my opinion, by making it so that the
schematic and board are never out of sync unless you do something deliberate
and stupid.  Even then you can run DRC and get a list of discrepencies,
although you get a lot of other barf to wade thru too.  This tightly
integrated approach is one of the thing I really like about Eagle.

Nothing is perfect, and my main gripes with Eagle are:

1 - I want more than one value field that can be individually shown or not
shown on the schematic.  On the schematic I might only want to show that a
cap is 100uF 20V, but I want a place to enter comments, manufacturer and
distributor part numbers, etc.  A ULP for creating a BOM would export all
these fields, then a program could look up part numbers in a data base and
automatically create a useable BOM.  Currently there is too much manual work
each time to create the BOM.

2 - There are far too many things that are flagged as design rule errors
that are necessary for making normal boards.  There need to be ways to
disable these individually when making a package.  At the very least I want
something in the package editor where I can say "Yes I know these two
polygons touch.  They are supposed to.  Don't nag me about it.".  As it is
now, a few slightly unusual package definitions can create 100s of DRC
errors so that real ones will get missed.

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist