X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Mime-Version:	1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Find rat lines
From:	John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<1355577174.24123.61.camel@thinkpad.richardbarlow.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 16 Dec 2012 11:42:19 -0700
Message-Id:	<34E3F8FB-5461-44D6-A287-2D74AFED5311@noqsi.com>
References:	<20121204183305 DOT 6b04c0dc AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org> <CACwWb3C9HcefpVy7npxmBKuzWvhU2JtmVzJsXOF4fh2SD9LsiQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <1355577174 DOT 24123 DOT 61 DOT camel AT thinkpad DOT richardbarlow DOT co DOT uk>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer:	Apple Mail (2.1085)
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id qBGIgOkl029636
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

On Dec 15, 2012, at 6:12 AM, Richard Barlow wrote:

> ultimately what matters is the actual connection between things, the
> copper doesn't care what net it belongs to.

And that's indeed the root of the problem. Short circuits involve engineering intention, but the hardware doesn't care what you intend, and the software doesn't know what you intend unless you tell it.

> The only bad thing with
> PCB's method is the highlighting of shorts and it seems that it should
> be possible to preserve PCB's current behaviour while vastly improving
> this using some graph theory.

I don't think that a program can reliably deduce the intention of the designer here, regardless of mathematical sophistication. Better to come up with more convenient ways to communicate and revise what that intention is.

I personally find software that attempts to read my mind difficult to use when the result needs to conform to rigorous requirements, as in engineering.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com

- Raw text -