Mail Archives: geda-user/2012/12/13/19:28:33
On Dec 13, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 16:23 -0700, John Doty wrote:
>> On Dec 10, 2012, at 6:17 PM, Peter Clifton wrote:
>>
>>> We could think of tagging copper with which net it belongs to (first
>>> touch to an object (e.g. pin / pad) with a net, sticks. Any
>>> inconsistencies would stick out then.
>>
>> The lack of this sort of simple, commonsense organizing principle
>> seems to me at the root of what I find so confusing about pcb. So,
>> instead of having a trivial way to rigorously identify shorts, pcb
>> will wind up with yet another complicated, unreliable,
>> incomprehensible heuristic.
>
>
> John, if you don't have anything constructive to say, please leave us to
> our discussion. I'm about fed up of negativity on this list.
>
> I think the algorithms being discussed have the potential to be really
> useful, quite frankly - don't care if you think otherwise.
Will they find short circuits as and reliably as the simple way? Will users find it easy to understand what's going on? Of course not. They may be useful for more elaborate analysis, but a complicated algorithm used as the basis of a heuristic is not going to be as usable as the simple, rigorous approach. And believe me, simply being able to inspect and adjust the properties and affinities of an object would be a tremendous improvement in the comprehensibility of pcb.
> (IIRC, you
> don't use PCB, do you?)
>
> I might not be my normal calm, diplomatic self at the moment,
Seem calm enough to me.
> but I
> think I'm going to hit send anyway. I can't count the times I've hit
> "cancel" after composing a reply to a thread you've "contributed" to.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Peter Clifton <peter DOT clifton AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk>
>
> Clifton Electronics
>
>
>
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com
- Raw text -