delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; |
d=gmail.com; s=gamma; | |
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date | |
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; | |
bh=Rf2D57uA18nGcdtQpl1fqx8YbD48lVq8Ti9hj4cWKDQ=; | |
b=UP8VD6tO9UaJVp+P8qsyoSfXj/QgOhqhQP56NAJ9O5LcmlDCxYzq5S5VQyMR7TYLCg | |
4WH4rjLR3D7K9tqq6tClXHZcKjnFlEyxi00mLXIUszlQYLat2OVQPy25CpyWqCfi97fo | |
Il+w+P3gi2reyEGe+955QXUf/ogMWAdCQGN5k= | |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Sender: | silicon DOT on DOT inspiration AT gmail DOT com |
In-Reply-To: | <20111021025514.GF20384@malakian.lan> |
References: | <CAKakQccTk7cNBhDt4SM=jq5hrEBzWC8er53JSSNsch5+-7pCWw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> |
<201110201548 DOT p9KFma9K019672 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> | |
<20111020172714 DOT GB20384 AT malakian DOT lan> | |
<CAKakQccb967HgSod6BeULhCSj7gE+L0oAVb=L82pGcOphJ7ohw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> | |
<20111021013756 DOT GE20384 AT malakian DOT lan> | |
<CAKakQceJ8GBzX+jHqrhpD2D+-f1eoMqb7h5igJhHe-DuwQB1aQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> | |
<20111021025514 DOT GF20384 AT malakian DOT lan> | |
Date: | Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:21:34 +1100 |
X-Google-Sender-Auth: | L_dTtrUwvXs5yu0enBTgyt4OthM |
Message-ID: | <CAKakQce6KV+roE8ESQkhqshcDTOf4zm=VXcvxGZhToeAEMoOaA@mail.gmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: [geda-user] Working with a 0.1mm grid |
From: | Stephen Ecob <stephen DOT ecob AT sioi DOT com DOT au> |
To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
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 |
>> I think that reading in using "mil" and "mm" suffixes without loss of >> precision isn't the problem. >> >> I think that the problem is that PCB throws away precision of metric >> values when saving. >> > > Yes. > > The question is, how precisely can we save, without producing files that > old versions of pcb can't read? I can see that having an option to save to a backwards compatible format is good - but can we also have an option to save in a newer format that supports accurate metric measurements (whilst dropping backwards compatibility) ? Stephen Ecob Silicon On Inspiration Sydney Australia www.sioi.com.au
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |