delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-Virus-Scanned: | by amavisd-new (Uni-Kiel/l2ms-sc) |
From: | geda AT psjt DOT org (Stephan =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=B6ttcher?=) |
To: | "Richard Rasker \(rasker\@linetec.nl\) \[via geda-user\@delorie.com\]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> |
Subject: | Re: [geda-user] Another PCB grid step question |
References: | <c3aa1897-3806-3f72-feef-85551a63c2db AT linetec DOT nl> |
Date: | Fri, 09 Feb 2018 11:19:58 +0100 |
In-Reply-To: | <c3aa1897-3806-3f72-feef-85551a63c2db@linetec.nl> (Richard |
Rasker's message of "Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:46:25 +0100") | |
Message-ID: | <s6nk1vmtqgh.fsf@falbala.ieap.uni-kiel.de> |
User-Agent: | Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
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 |
"Richard Rasker (rasker AT linetec DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> writes: > Isn't it far more logical to adopt the logarithm-based step scheme > that is ubiquitous wherever scaling takes place, so 1 - 2 - 5 - 10 - > 20 - 50 etcetera? I find it difficult to work with steps sizes that are not integer multiples. Doing some work a 2.5mil, when switching to 1mil I cannot find half the endpoints. Requires some discipline to skip some steps, accoring to preferences. Either 1 - 5 - 10, or 1 - 2 - 10. -- Stephan
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |