X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<1407607347.2887.13.camel@AMD64X2>
Subject:	[geda-user] How smart is gschems 1.9.1 rubberbanding?
From:	Stefan Salewski <mail AT ssalewski DOT de>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 09 Aug 2014 20:02:27 +0200
X-Mailer:	Evolution 3.10.4
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

While doing some more cleanup, I noticed that I have missed rubberband
support in my peted tool. I have not really missed it, I think when I
used gschem some years ago for the last time I always deactivated it.

But I understand that people may want it, and it may be useful indeed.

I just started thinking about how rubberbands may work -- my first idea
was that connectivity should be always preserved, and that we should
avoid diagonal nets. Just launched gschem 1.9.1 -- seems that
connectivity can break, and that we may get diagonal nets when moving
objects around. Is this intended, is this what we want? I have no idea.
I just do not want to spent some hours of work for my own rubberbanding
and then discover that that gschems way is better.

I think there was one suggestion for improving gschem rubberbanding
postet to this list, maybe one or two years ago. Has someone still a
reference?

- Raw text -