X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=5HjVhw+4MpzuKIQF7t66XK+KUJ9eUuXULrgQC+zRGpg=;
	b=kH8t2ONx310gpSoHWuzuYmqF9gFmbQMAHx9sfnZ65cjBxYZRXI0XdzLTMn8Ef075/I
	8WZc3k6wND3l71SN820Cjy4LmhNDiKffDLtZ5MxZ845oy6bJ740rAxtRsnBMeyhhWD6F
	il+VLQU/90uF+RPaOB76Gp8zjIUrIMTC5bNN1w2Vvnxm2kzL7P9/Xqm2Bt0r94YQ2Cu/
	KiCNhxlu4DzsWdTFXzQAO/fzQ+OQKp3u+PYG67BnXsFxmCb1rZFMk02KYd2PJiRSRVk7
	W3hsG+FAZixFjZiznvZjK/DgVmHVKxLxFOp3c4GUUjaPp3TtTl8RgQVF1p3mxvxzeiG6
	OoLw==
X-Received:	by 10.112.219.197 with SMTP id pq5mr36407455lbc.73.1452358145180;
	Sat, 09 Jan 2016 08:49:05 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:48:59 +0100
From:	"Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Primitive electrical types [WAS: Re: first attempt
	at bus support in gnetlist for pcb]
Message-Id:	<20160109174859.dd0f8a57f22b639eeed623fb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:	<6CD06E56-4FC6-4CFD-A6A8-0297CC1F995B@noqsi.com>
References:	<CAJXU7q8edycnyhZbZ7+M3q6HA13U4Tr5R9M7KAG59HVpH2+cMg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<6CD06E56-4FC6-4CFD-A6A8-0297CC1F995B AT noqsi DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
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

> > Whether or not this is fully factored in the code or not, from the graphical entity point of view these are effectively sub-type specialisations of the line primitive, as John has suggested. Whilst it would be technically possible to take this as a more "duck typed" approach, I'd probably not suggest it.
> 
> What I was trying to get at is that I see line drawing style as a fundamentally orthogonal issue to line “type". What we have now is hard-wired, except for purely graphical lines. That doesn’t fit all uses. It gets us into unresolvable arguments over thick net segments for power versus thin segments for signals. Conventions are good. Defaults implementing conventions are good. Hard wiring them is bad.
> 
> John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
> http://www.noqsi.com/
> jpd AT noqsi DOT com

You mean if a line should be considered: net, bus, pin, ... should depend on an assigned attribute?


Nicklas Karlsson

- Raw text -