74HC595 & 74HC165 - might have to make your own.
Find a similar part, Ungroup the Component & edit as needed, then Group back into the new component. Very easy to do.
Pardon me, but how are the 74HC595 & 74HC165 called in ExpressPCB? I can't find them.
Pardon me as well. This thread is about schematic diagrams. All IC's are represented by rectangles.
Don
@CrossRoads & @floresta: Thanks and sorry for the diversion...
EDIT @floresta: rectangles indeed, but not remotely the same ones, as a trip to ExpressSCH can quickly reveal (or a look at this ExpressSCH output).
The diagrams produced by Eagle are more closely related to 'wiring diagrams', they are not at all useful as schematic diagrams.
Example:
If you look at pin 19 of the IC in the diagram in reply #3 you can see that it is connected to pin 6 of the 'Upper_Digital' connector. There is no clue that it is connected to anything else. You must scour the entire drawing (and hope you didn't miss anything) to find any other connections.If you look at pin 19 of the IC in the diagram in reply #1 you can easily see that it is connected not only to pin 8 of Port B but also to pin 3 of the ICSP connector.
As the creator of both diagrams you reference, I am calling both of those a schematic. If you want to refer to one as a wiring diagram, go ahead, but I would suggest you need a layout to go along with the schematic to really be able to wire anything.
Anything else is just a schematic in my mind.
The pictures produced by fritzing with wires only and no details of what the connections are doing could be considered a wiring diagram. Not at all useful for debugging.
I am calling both of those a schematic.
That's essentially the heart of the problem. Lots of people call the Eagle type drawings 'schematics' ... but they aren't. There is an important difference that I tried to explain in simple terms by means of the example in reply #18.
but I would suggest you need a layout to go along with the schematic to really be able to wire anything.
That may be true especially for beginners. But on the other hand if you try to do troubleshooting using a wiring diagram you are likely to miss something.
Don
Lots of people call the Eagle type drawings 'schematics' ... but they aren't.
Just because all connections are not shown with point to point lines drawn doesn't mean it's not a schematic.
I can design all day, and follow other designs, that have only only the names of the signals coming from pins.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree.
Whether the lines are drawn in or not is irrelevant. At the end of the day it's the netlist that's important 
Just because all connections are not shown with point to point lines drawn doesn't mean it's not a schematic.
That is quite true. In my experience, however, on a schematic any point to point lines that are not shown are indicated with 'stubs' and some information that is used to identify the other end. This is not done on the Eagle diagrams because all of that information is in some other document such as a netlist.
I can design all day, and follow other designs, that have only only the names of the signals coming from pins.
That is true as well. The real difference comes when you are trying to troubleshoot something that you did not design. In that case trying to figure out how signals travel and what pins are connected to what other pins is infinitely easier with a schematic diagram than with a wiring diagram. The more complex the design the more true this becomes.
I am not saying that the type of diagrams produced by Eagle are incorrect or that they are not useful. They certainly are helpful if you are manually laying out a PC board (we really used to do that). I am just saying that they are not true 'schematic' diagrams in the technical sense of the term. The lack of true schematic diagrams will ultimately become moot as we gravitate to the mode of replacing all failed devices rather than repairing them.
Don
Edit: Majenko - I really didn't steal your netlist idea, I wrote my post before I read yours. What you are saying is true as well, on a complex circuit you really need a netlist to complement the Eagle diagram.
Floresta: your complaints against EAGLE "schematics" are against the style of diagrams posted, not inherent to EAGLE itself. It's perfectly possible to make fully connected schematics with EAGLE, or schematics with stubs, or the diagrams with named but invisible nets. It's up to the designer, and what they're trying to show (or think they're trying to show.) Your "pin 6" example is particularly ambiguous WRT "signal flow", since in the actual circuit there isn't signal flow from port pin to ICSP connector to IC; it's more of an either/or situation.
All of which is a bit irrelevant, since the original question asked about "quick diagrams for the forums."
Some of this will be dependent on what else you plan to do. I use EAGLE (and "export image") for my quick diagrams, because I'm already using it for more serious designs. While it's probably not the easiest thing to use, and certainly not to learn, I'm already familiar it, so I'm not seeing that it would be useful to learn ANOTHER program that would be slightly quicker for quick diagrams. And I wouldn't want to spend time learning something like expressSCH if the associated PCB app is useless, nor do I want to use a simple drawing tool (Visio?) that doesn't include any electrical knowledge of the circuit.
A "Netlist" is a representation of the electrical interconnections. If the Schematic is unreadable from the schematic it is because the designer chose to do it in that manner. Schematics (at least the ones I draw are accurate on both points because it is both an accurate orderly picture of the design and also and accurate orderly diagram of the connectivity. Anything less is a reflection of the designers ability to accurately present an orderly picture of the design. Thats the way I learned it and thats the way I do it... 'Nuff said?
Doc
Eagle will also create a Netlist if you'd prefer to check that.
I use the schematic DRC to make sure everything I think is connected is actually connected, and I name ALL my nets because trying to figure what "N$16" is actually connected to is a total pain in the ass when manually routing a board or finishing the autorouter's job, or changing what the autorouter did if it ran a signal all over the place.
Floresta: your complaints against EAGLE "schematics" are against the style of diagrams posted, not inherent to EAGLE itself
.
My sole complaint about these Eagle drawings is the use of the term 'schematic' to describe the versions that are almost universally posted. I guess this comes from having taught Engineering Drafting back in pre-historic times. As far as I am concerned it is the same as scraping fingernails on a blackboard - but as far as I can tell blackboards are also pre-historic as well so many may not know what I am talking about.
Don
floresta:
but as far as I can tell blackboards are also pre-historic as well so many may not know what I am talking about.
Hey, I remember blackboards. Heck, I even had instruction at some grade level on the proper way to hold chalk for writing on them, which is different from how you hold an instrument for writing on paper. However, from your point of view, I guess I'm still wet behind the ears at 51. 
So anyway, in keeping with my youth and inexperience, after reading some definitions and Wikipedia articles, I still don't get what the dispute is about, re. schematic, since the term seems definitionally indistinct. Maybe one of you kind elders ]
could point me to the 'term of art' definition relevant to this. Yes, seriously, I'd like to know, so that I can use the term correctly. Maybe I want to say circuit diagram instead.
Circuit diagram would be a better description. Creating a good one is a matter of attention to detail. Netlisting in a necessity but where most designers I have seen fail is in remembering that net names are cryptic and often chosen by the netlist extractor, the art is in arranging the Net names in an orderly manner, renaming them as necessary for legibility and placing then more or less in groups so that they are easily found. Anyone can draw a schematic, it takes some little skill to present it such a manner as to make it a good tool for others to use. Net tags Should be arranged in "Blocks" for lack of a better work so that all are readily visible and relate to the design both in terms of legibility and relevancy. In a good cad program you have the choice to name nets in such a manner as to make them human relevant rather that machine relevant Net U2-2 doesn't mean much but TX_Led does. When the designer fails to do that he does a disservice to himself and to all that might have to use the document after it is created. Most I have seen so far look like they were created by Programmer,engineers rather than Designer,Engineers. It is an easy task to do if one is familiar with the tools used and comfortable with the task at hand. It does take some ability to organize the task and schematic properly and I really don't understand why this isn't done... The Schematic IS the Master Database as it alone contains all the part information. This was a daily responsibility for me for 20 years.
Doc
Maybe I want to say circuit diagram instead.
I would say that the term circuit diagram is a broad category that includes all types of drawings of electrical circuits.
A schematic diagram is a type of circuit diagram that uses symbols to represent each component but those symbols do not necessarily look like the components themselves. Also, the external connections are placed where needed to make the circuit operation easy to understand, typically with inputs on one side and outputs on the other side. I would put the diagram accompanying reply #1 in this category.
A wiring diagram also uses symbols to represent each component and those symbols, although two-dimensional, frequently look much like the components themselves. External connections are placed to represent where they actually appear on the device. I would put many of the Eagle diagrams that I see in this category although on closer examination the one accompanying reply #3 does have many of the characteristics of a schematic.
Pictoral diagrams are an extreme example of wiring diagrams where sort of 'three dimensional' pictures are used to more accurately portray the components. The diagrams produced by 'Fritzing' usually fall in this category.
[Edit] After much reflection I would now place the Eagle diagrams in some different category. The one accompanying reply #3 does indeed have many characteristics that I attribute to a schematic. I still feel that a true schematic diagram would not require one to search randomly through the entire diagram just to find out if perhaps there is anything else connected to a specific pin.
Don
I fully agree . It is the JOB of the draftsman to create drawings that are both technically accurate and usable at the same time... most of what I see is good only for extracting a netlist. Part of my early training was as a draftsman and later I hated it when I found those Ugly documents with cryptic symbols. A little time spent on making the document readable which is the central issue here is well spent when you have to go back and fix the Da*m thing later. For 20 years I worked for a guy that did the New York Times crossword puzzles in ink... Every Morning.
Doc
For 20 years I worked for a guy that did the New York Times crossword puzzles in ink... Every Morning.
I do it every evening at 10 (when they post the next day's puzzle) on my computer. I've done them all since mid march in 1999.
Don
Every morning this guy Did the puzzle. I never did check him... he was an Israeli guy with a neat freak complex I worked for him for 20 years and that was one of his little 'power trips'. His English after 25 years here in the US still wasn't as good as mine is. He somehow forgot that I frequently caught him in spelling and grammatical errors. I't no idiot but I RELY on my spell checker. This is just some of the b... s that some people have to do, like part of some elaborate act. Also I think that is I need to post a circuit I had be ready to back it up and I can Simulate in Altium 10 I think. It,s a beast to boot up, takes a little over a minute and a lot of my resources but OK I think in the end. IMO
Doc