I placed a Generic Shrouded Header into my sketch. I’m able to change its form and number of pins with the Inspector panel, but any attempt to change the row, position, or package parameters is immediately reverted back to the default. See the attached image, where both single and double are listed as options. When I click single, it displays as selected for an instant, then flashes back to double, not actually changing the component.
What I expected should have happened instead:
I’d expect to be able to change all the parameters that have options listed. Specifically, I’d like to change the headers to single row shrouded male header.
My version of Fritzing and my operating system:
I’m on Fritzing Version 0.9.4, and I’m running OSX Mojave, Version 10.14.6
For most parts, changing the value of properties (except part number") shown by Inspector replaces the current part with another part in the same “family”. When changing parts like that, Fritzing matches the property that was changed, then tries to match as many of the other property values as well. Sometimes, like this case, no part has been defined with exactly that combination of properties, so Fritzing does the best it can. As Old_Grey said, you can try working with a more generic plain header, or someone needs to create the part that matches properties you tried to use. Which would be a post in “parts help”.
This is not a bug. It is just a limit on the parts that have been created and added to the core library.
I believe (I’m not on a machine with Fritzing at the moment) this is a parts factory part. That means the code generates a part on the fly from the parameters you specify. There are a number of bugs and limitations in that code (dual row standard headers in breadboard for one and I seem to remember shrouded headers having some as well.) I started to fix some of the bugs I know of, and then ran in to the fact that there is code to deal with older versions of the parts which is going to make changes to this area fairly complex. We need to be able to deal with supporting all the older versions possible when making changes. Currently I think there is only one older version, with more than one things will get complex! so I expect fixes are going to take some time and a lot of thought. I thought this would be easy and I had made some changes some years ago without seeing the older version problem. While those changes work, they likely will break the older version code which I hadn’t considered when I made them. That is part of the problem with making code changes, what should be a simple fix often has hidden complications in the code base, and unless you are familiar with the code (which I think none of the current developers are) you can break things without realizing it.
Thanks all for the helpful advice, and apologies if I posted this in the wrong section. It just seemed like undesirable behavior to have a visible option that was not actually selectable, and I couldn’t find any discussion of how the option in the properties tab should work.
I will look into working with an alternate part, or making my own part.
