Mail Archives: geda-user/2016/02/02/03:46:07
Stephan Böttcher wrote:
>> I did not get what "depth=200" is for.
>
> Currently, the PCB objects come with a lot of implicit aura
> attached, polygon clearance, soldermask clearance, solderpad,
> thermals, ...
>
> A generic geometry may need to be more explicit.
>
> Everything is drawn at a depth. There are positive and negative
> depths. Deeper stuff is drawn before shallower stuff. Negative
> depth draw holes and clerances.
>
I feel like this is the kind of magic that looks elegant and generic
on inception but tends to turn into an obstacle further down the
evolution of the application. Specifically:
* In addition to positive and negative, there may arise the need for a
third mode of drawing. E.g. XOR-drawing. (No, I don't know what XOR-
draw would be good for in the context of EDA -- just brain storming)
* The depth parameter kind of enforces the way how to render the
design. It would be more flexible and potentially easier to extend to
mark-up the intended meaning.
---<)kaimartin(>---
- Raw text -