X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.ucs.cam.ac.uk/email/scanner/ Message-ID: <1356047475.5629.4.camel@localhost> Subject: Re: [geda-user] Find rat lines - summary From: Peter Clifton To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:51:15 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20121220122149.GB20493@visitor2.iram.es> References: <20121208112649 DOT 388a9d22 AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org> <1355011808 DOT 19390 DOT 8 DOT camel AT localhost> <1355861174 DOT 13534 DOT 14 DOT camel AT localhost> <20121220101819 DOT GA26060 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es> <1356003432 DOT 4776 DOT 10 DOT camel AT localhost> <20121220122149 DOT GB20493 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.2-0ubuntu2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 13:21 +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > Well, some of my designs were broken by PCB upgrades, in the area of > copper pours if I remember correctly. I always keep the photoplotter > files I send to the manufacturer just in case I need a new batch (and > in one case it was useful since the manufacturer of the first batch > went bankrupt), but if I had to modify it... That I'm interested about.. if you have test cases you can share (even privately), let me know. Was this breakage a long time ago, around the time polygon support was changed from dumb flood-fill, to our current connectivity aware behaviour which keeps the largest clipped piece only? I know of some designs which were broken by that change. The breakage boils down to the fact that the "fullpoly" flag (which was introduced much later), should have been implemented with that original change, and defaulted to on, at least for polygons in files prior to the version where the new behaviour was added. This would preserve the old geometry. If it wasn't related to this change (which I know about, and cannot fix), I'm very interested to see examples. > > > > Try the split-colouring, and see what you think. I'm also going to > > > > experiment with de-saturating colours or increasing transparency on > > > > non-found objects in the GL renderer, to see how that feels. > > > > > > I will try over the week-end. I feel that split colouring might > > > work well enough. > > > > The idea is that it is an improvement over both old and current > > behaviours ;) > > I can believe it. I really considered your previous patch a regression, > but color differentiation is going forward. Yes - that change was well intentioned, but not well thought out. I mentally associated a different "correct" behaviour with that function than it previously had, and failed to take into account what people already used it for. Regards, -- Peter Clifton Clifton Electronics