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=20120113;
	h=sender:message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to:references
	:content-type:x-mailer:mime-version;
	bh=qEL56jtaHnhRWa7QjlkKbwdSnIlQouCyDKox59QTsvU=;
	b=rYlONzrgq827h8IrN3WBQ5xWu2n1KKniUZeX6/ojXGHFUYrdcMYRgV1NgBNueqAGS2
	JAIoTfbPoYyyjFCGVF4D7pxkrUxHUSulr6JNY+OlOunJNOonNUqj22JW/oKHgrT5WMUi
	opDamSbSPMiDC8gPH1OuDyHD018hHNO3oprWxyxYIDMvRiCCn5Us/u6kvJKipCRVjpP1
	RnIUBLrC3xs8Swa9Tayn1ANkO4nQ09N9X4imyklNHXEYhTQ+A990MiXaikoXrwl2i77j
	uDfpoxORlllG7vRqDHoxW0lQforH51QQUFRHCYixOrh/ktomJgKfmQ2cVV6MHdQvC06g
	gG9Q==
Sender:	Richard Barlow <skkinny AT gmail DOT com>
Message-ID:	<1355775067.24123.70.camel@thinkpad.richardbarlow.co.uk>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Find rat lines
From:	Richard Barlow <richard AT richardbarlow DOT co DOT uk>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:11:07 +0000
In-Reply-To:	<50CF7505.8020800@jump-ing.de>
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>
	<34E3F8FB-5461-44D6-A287-2D74AFED5311 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<20121217033732 DOT 26277 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<CACwWb3BvZj-sr_63yFiD8gO0NwXD47rtibqBEaAD2LMvf6de1w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<BC6C1A61-0173-4C84-8C0F-470D92B135D9 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<CACwWb3BvJj9LSoBHADaY1ZN-q9zE8+A+arHB7N_YcWozarqeQA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<v4n3q9xtcm DOT ln2 AT skate DOT rswarbrick> <50CF7505 DOT 8020800 AT jump-ing DOT de>
X-Mailer:	Evolution 3.4.4 (3.4.4-2.fc17)
Mime-Version:	1.0
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

--=-QcoB6rmriN8rIuNosuab
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 20:39 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Am 17.12.2012 15:34, schrieb Rupert Swarbrick:
> > Levente<leventelist AT gmail DOT com>  writes:
> >> >This will also makes a short. No difference.
> > I think that Markus's point is that PCB wouldn't regard this as a short
> > between the two nets.
>=20
> Unfortunately, it does.

Ah yes, of course. So there are two bad things with PCBs current
method ;)

Btw, I should have mentioned in my first email: I do like the sound of
using a combination of optional tagging and the minimum cut heuristic
(which, as it seems some people are forgetting, is only there as a tool
to aid the designer, not as a perfect solution that removes all
responsibility from the designer). I expect by using a mix of the two
you can solve the short-through-a-footprint problem by tagging the nets
involved, therefore explicitly stating your intent to PCB, and you don't
lose the current flexibility.

Rich

--=-QcoB6rmriN8rIuNosuab
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAABAgAGBQJQz3xbAAoJEMWwul/B8SCJEYsH/0xZQiomS3h9iVzxoIzcwWWj
X+yA5bdouTdOR7e6TRBKlkO2UGHskJkDcFg0+yyEkZZKdU999rsuFqBeUyQoTMhf
xp8fioO9RJWOZa+gMkSg6q/pnI1Q7wHfa4Ppm3lvrmc5dce5x6+GzIsMvL6yqzrk
kwOhOLrKua06uh4p3m81kr31tVbKvmlP2QNKdTpvK+eWnHehgBMHMUsWT5oO/b5L
D8PERTUXKKYOMYJY72hXRntfUeLmwvHXggfImAqXL9qG2MZr3PZ4xo8qtoCvO4eg
d36NfpEJhHWeoNGqPA10313YlobFZBc1x3tN+hVeWNG0HWW3hwfeSkl/NA6FIZo=
=vKFj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-QcoB6rmriN8rIuNosuab--

- Raw text -