Mail Archives: geda-user/2012/01/18/05:59:57
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:50:26AM +0100, Krzysztof Kościuszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 18 stycznia 2012 10:33 użytkownik Peter Stuge <peter AT stuge DOT se> napisał:
> > Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> >> gschem: skip drawing endpoint cues on fully connected nets.
> >>
> >> Affects-bug: lp-707064
> >>
> >> causes some dots to disappear.
> >
> > I too think this is a problem.
> >
> > Keep in mind that there are different types of dots.
> >
> > Recently there was a report about an unconnected net, which also
> > lost it's endpoint cue.
> >
> > What gives? Krzysztof, maybe you can talk a little about the theory
> > behind the change?
>
> Probably I have not tested all the corner cases appropriately.
> Dumping all the cue types in one function does not help either.
Indeed, I've given up trying to understand the code.
However after sending the mail, I reverted the commit
(actually applied the patch with -R) and the dot is back.
> In the bug report it seems the lower pin of the diode connects with
> two net segments, while the top pin connects to net in a midpoint.
Correct. The dots only seem to appear in the middle of segments, but
not when you have a mix of pins and net segments. And, as far as I remember
there was never a dot when three pins coincide, which may happen fairly
frequently in passive circuits as shown in the new attachments; these do
not cover all the cases, since up to 4 pins/segments may coincide easily,
and more if you use non horizontal/vertical net segments or, shudder, pins.
> Possibly this is the missed corner case - I'll investigate this later on.
> Analysis of John Doty's report on the issues with implementation is
> also on my TODO list.
Good.
Regards,
Gabriel
- Raw text -