X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=sk0L1vEIeYU/QeqK5jnFndx8Hx+UgZ37FubGAFY5058=; b=qvhkelzBivNeM5u8YHimHMcn3fASjz74KLykPWstcFkdAc93J1us4ctDcbUDQg62na R2VSRYyn6nxqaORJ4i2+BxqzQfdglQTvUwXTlF3x/CxpuYhvn94zBBTCPjgloUgi6a4q R9eSUlj8q5TnZ66uJGGoGYuJsMBJIdTp8KWxAK7LbHxLaaxa46J6iPmfIU9NYBXMOnw/ kwBXl+tzcEIXp4bXxMw5uLMRQkhitUoZwgmEl4lOU0pcdppRP2YlzBEnChOd58SpOj2F nmJPUO+2nGBdh+HO65bS4m/m1bilrL1yjaOdcRLj1fsLYpdGjCRl6DZfa73ZjEIXXUt1 zGEA== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1355577174.24123.61.camel@thinkpad.richardbarlow.co.uk> References: <20121204183305 DOT 6b04c0dc AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org> <1355577174 DOT 24123 DOT 61 DOT camel AT thinkpad DOT richardbarlow DOT co DOT uk> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:15:11 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] Find rat lines From: Levente To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54d47667a1eb204d108d1b1 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 Precedence: bulk --bcaec54d47667a1eb204d108d1b1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Richard Barlow wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 10:29 +0100, Levente wrote: > > I lost track of this thread, but I have an idea. I've seen this > > implementation in Zuzken CR5000 Board designer. Each copper object had > > an attribute called "net". When you place a track you could click on > > an object to connect to. This way, there is no need to do any graphs, > > etc. Just compare touching copper objects net attribute. If it is not > > the same emit warning. > > A few weeks ago I had to layout a board using Eagle, due to the project > already using Eagle. From my experience Eagle uses this method and I > found it to be extremely annoying to use. For the most part it was fine, > but the one thing that was very hard to do was place vias and then route > traces to/from them. It's fine if you're placing a trace and switch > layers; Eagle places a via and all the net attributes are correct. > However this isn't that great a work-flow if you're laying out a very > dense board, where you have to jiggle things around to get an wide bus > onto another layer. Eagle complains continuously about nets being > shorted. > > I also encountered other annoying situations caused by this manual > assignment of net attributes to everything, where I found myself > effectively managing the EDA's state for it, rather than getting on with > the task in hand. > > I find PCB's method of tracking connectivity to be less constraining and > allows for more varied work-flows. It's also closer to reality in that > ultimately what matters is the actual connection between things, the > copper doesn't care what net it belongs to. The only bad thing with > PCB's method is the highlighting of shorts and it seems that it should > be possible to preserve PCB's current behaviour while vastly improving > this using some graph theory. If at all possible I think we should > strive to keep the notion of copper being 'free' in PCB. > > I find annoying PCB's method when you place a VIA. You are not allowed connect wire to a newly placed VIA. If only you could connect a floating object to any net, that would be some advantage. Levente --bcaec54d47667a1eb204d108d1b1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Richard= Barlow <richard AT richardbarlow DOT co DOT uk> wrote:
On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 10:29 +0100, Levente wrote:
> I lost track of this thread, but I have an idea. I've seen this > implementation in Zuzken CR5000 Board designer. Each copper object had=
> an attribute called "net". When you place a track you could = click on
> an object to connect to. This way, there is no need to do any graphs,<= br> > etc. Just compare touching copper objects net attribute. If it is not<= br> > the same emit warning.

A few weeks ago I had to layout a board using Eagle, due to the project
already using Eagle. From my experience Eagle uses this method and I
found it to be extremely annoying to use. For the most part it was fine, but the one thing that was very hard to do was place vias and then route traces to/from them. It's fine if you're placing a trace and switch=
layers; Eagle places a via and all the net attributes are correct.
However this isn't that great a work-flow if you're laying out a ve= ry
dense board, where you have to jiggle things around to get an wide bus
onto another layer. Eagle complains continuously about nets being
shorted.

I also encountered other annoying situations caused by this manual
assignment of net attributes to everything, where I found myself
effectively managing the EDA's state for it, rather than getting on wit= h
the task in hand.

I find PCB's method of tracking connectivity to be less constraining an= d
allows for more varied work-flows. It's also closer to reality in that<= br> ultimately what matters is the actual connection between things, the
copper doesn't care what net it belongs to. The only bad thing with
PCB's method is the highlighting of shorts and it seems that it should<= br> be possible to preserve PCB's current behaviour while vastly improving<= br> this using some graph theory. If at all possible I think we should
strive to keep the notion of copper being 'free' in PCB.


I find annoying PCB's method when you place a VIA. You are not allowed connect wire to a=20 newly placed VIA.

If only you could connect a floating object to any= =20 net, that would be some advantage.

Levente
=A0

--bcaec54d47667a1eb204d108d1b1--