Mail Archives: geda-user/2012/08/09/06:53:37
On 09/08/12 09:23, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> there's a patch for the G-code exporter available which replaces the
> definition of the board size.
>
> Currently, there are these two values (Width, Height) in the
> preferences dialog. At the same time, a board shape shall be defined
> by the outline layer. IMHO, this situation is a bit contradicting in
> its self.
>
> The new solution for the G-code exporter whould be to walk through
> each track of the outline layer to find the minimum and maximum
> extents. Looks more reasonable to my understanding and whould make the
> values in the preferences dialog obsolete (except, perhaps, for
> internal calculations, which should be hidden).
>
> My question now is, whould calculating the board size dynamically be a
> good solution for the entire application? Users whould resize the
> board by just moving the tracks on the outline layer and these two
> preferences items could (eventually) go away. I'd prefer to work on a
> general solution instead of bringing in custom stuff for just this
> exporter.
>
> Opinions are welcome as much as hints on where/how a general solutuion
> should be coded.
>
>
> Markus
>
Hi Markus,
I'd second this suggestion. I'm working on a pick and place exporter to
speed things up for our rapid prototyping facilities and found the board
size to be a bit confusing.
For me the solution was to ignore the board outline layer and the size
of the design canvas and work all measurements our from the location of
the first fiducial in my designs. This has the added bonus that the
outline layer and the board size set in the preferences are not
affecting the part locations since they're always relative to the fiducial.
I'd be interested to try out the patch to the gcode exporter.
Thanks,
Ed
- Raw text -