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=X2HtVFiorCEyAeGP6zAgYZt9IrhQamqKh3MVd1kInYg=;
	b=zg5GpMgQ70MuPBAhbRVDKn6SjnTbomD2RR6sPXT4AWUp5P6sd241stuU25jn139YQo
	n0XzPJOEyYvyrGdnBkjtdh5XIxBuVHnWUUS4IbSyAZurmGHsLC27Xbzej6Lq7qz4xjKx
	9kuZMy1/JPiuUi4p4TM0w2cjpnJy3E77vBR3EsB+wK32ZlS7Bi/8/ZxQRL9c+vSxeZZd
	i8lsdFy7ut8+oxLpDE3qXux3DG75KQPhUUDvmEh1DJhSIJNQvtWql4doNEcAXf9iDmlT
	A/4IOLHoz9xCN1igPSoamQbzO/+U5tC3+C2dBSEkhX/vBZDVkOQYE8itk1JaV6wt3h+Q
	H9Tg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=X2HtVFiorCEyAeGP6zAgYZt9IrhQamqKh3MVd1kInYg=;
	b=XqewEXv5EdWHDfDCYghqy4MbWUvvhjnq/X/z/sCFtkOH1FqiVK3ZSf5Yc9QxUdFmPX
	TENZXHkVt/mLK90FPQK4+20JXQ3tmBd0ze2kpwTsLuFvD7FAob1yd0fA0NR0N4WRtKcG
	6okD3n6z/hx726OPOmPz4c2Wv8KFP0UDz45HhLXpxbEW7Lv6WXAxwu5SXS2y3V88Nsm5
	luC5b47F2eX+L6RJIJWJ5pDTtHTknX4Z47/PRNNYyt0YJHnC4E8nQWe1Y67pq6imDA8t
	faUFfXuseXmkY17Y9KEfPhQMbFiJb5B5qfbg6aNtFvlI10g553LKgMk/F7/pRKkz24CY
	VcRg==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AG10YOTnqYGyOhbmSPWQSHgIBS1bO+FsfeoJu2nUGig+Hn1h4MyB1QzkSd3AtMVMaY5/qg==
X-Received:	by 10.25.165.133 with SMTP id o127mr2489323lfe.105.1455349134373;
	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:38:54 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:38:49 +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] [PATCH] Elements Window
Message-Id:	<20160213083849.f703efce1dcc200b6927c3f6@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:	<CAC4O8c8ohMKzs7=7-nEML_ZyLFo9m_8kQ=YeGu7yfSnAcey-9A@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<1455231503 DOT 28583 DOT 17 DOT camel AT robspanton DOT com>
	<1455234590 DOT 2726 DOT 11 DOT camel AT robspanton DOT com>
	<20160212225307 DOT e25f32f46e1a39015ec4d7cd AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c8ohMKzs7=7-nEML_ZyLFo9m_8kQ=YeGu7yfSnAcey-9A AT mail DOT gmail 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

> >> When I'm editing a PCB, I often find that I want to find a group of
> >> components on it.  For example, I want to find a certain set of
> >> decoupling capacitors to make sure they're positioned appropriately.
> >> This is quite a slow process in pcb at the moment, as one has to use the
> >> "Select by name" menu a lot etc.
> >
> > Seems like a really good search and select window.
> >
> > There is another selection problem. It is quite common a circuit have be moved a little bit or reused for example a power supply. I had an idea to add a sub layout switch so that all objects added while working would belong to the selected sub laout. Then they could be select --> copied, moved or reused.
> 
> Something along these lines does seem like the most realistic way to
> get more graceful hierarchical layout.  Rather than changing the type
> hierarchy just add a list-of-objects type thing that groups existing
> stuff.  A copy of the layer structure is needed as well because lines
> etc. don't know where they are intrinsically (or else you have to
> mangle the objects themselves).  The IDs would have to be made
> permanent (ie saved, rather than reassigned each session).  And of
> course actually doing useful things with the sets.
> 
> I wouldn't make a switch that makes other additions automatically add
> to sets though.  Just tell users to select what they want to include.
> There are already a number of global options that influence the
> per-object flag settings of subsequently created objects, and though
> it's not at all obvious how to do some of the things they do
> otherwise, they make for confusing and buggy behavior.  Explicitly
> selecting the set is a very small amount of additional work compared
> to doing the module design and layout.
> 
> Britton

I could see three options:
  1. Put the objects in a hirerachy.
  2. A list of objects for each sub layout.
  3. Add an attribute to tell which sub layout they belong.
I would guess (2.) or (3.) are most realistic.

Nicklas Karlsson

- Raw text -