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=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=F5VFUjtYuOfZb2ETK3s137WlI6611+GVVNuaVAteOWU=; b=gRFcdi7bSe0sdcx62kNDDdB6O9mkSpJIkRA3nQLKDzgSdZxDX40eSu2o1ofdkV8YhC QJqkVxUx88o5TDGUI8yaA4/SAo+UQ56yi5YpxqZ+Z5iRfzGL/LQrSKTZ5b16pwdQbYrV /WLzgW4Zzs7XaC105I9oBmfj1sr3t0+SApT2f96rSBidBo+pQa0xQEEKNKv5bF0FSYUa mmiSzeCxgKW3odKO66FRxEVycLWJo7CvcWC/TbUS4Ob0W1NTCyodLDBw7qp5Sm+5Y4hs weOediwa2zaC8W3Txr3rvWhtTgfDLpBrY/NZdasKMwaATK800Xa1Midh81aJ5SOGbRe+ 0t+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=F5VFUjtYuOfZb2ETK3s137WlI6611+GVVNuaVAteOWU=; b=AMUl2vEKpUA945PFxrUoYtsWg6ia9hOD/xU+cQ1S4TFo67a+dcNiGQnUxLu/ZcNDjv UjNk5uIg5xcmcaPJsFI2vLeNpB/271A/NT0/7lDrvDkvdgkT2bh4rfGZK4Vz3skO3aRI i5BYiuaeP/4cdImnyLGUcAMfOuFNLJonEkMHV1ht3YRg6EQ+zR9lDcacpTXs3brcyMCj vM8/VBmd/X8UeIU3hfGpEu+li2Yr8I8A6VeiID3XhFZpzpHvT8bJxEaoZX/GDgQOU98q DYwJzZ99ZxzY5xLaZN+4AiO/w7CYt7BlqhnwuwpbIY9PIUjsc6HzIR+z+1Crk8EVFj2/ QTkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTrq1I6VZ+pe/y517J01gF0IIniPYzMLlEOM0Wxzh6rujpaSjE5urzAPvryM8nC0dFSygVobjheU5fuIw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.23.73 with SMTP id 70mr4868966wmx.37.1454012536485; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 12:22:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160128200126.0fe1bb26d5c28e59d56dfd0e@gmail.com> References: <20160126233332 DOT dec2f06f5c74354a3841989c AT gmail DOT com> <20160127091746 DOT 1c7a976c2752f913921688ac AT gmail DOT com> <20160127141334 DOT c738feb9dbeb54a7dec3dff8 AT gmail DOT com> <56A8F74B DOT 8080304 AT ecosensory DOT com> <56A961BC DOT 3040405 AT ecosensory DOT com> <56A9E416 DOT 8080500 AT ecosensory DOT com> <20160128200126 DOT 0fe1bb26d5c28e59d56dfd0e AT gmail DOT com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:22:16 -0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] The nature of gEDA layers From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id u0SKMLor026439 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 On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 09:28:08 -0900 > "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Stephan Böttcher wrote: >> > John Griessen writes: >> > >> >> On 01/28/2016 02:41 AM, Stephan Böttcher wrote: >> >>> "Chad Parker (parker DOT charles AT gmail DOT com) [viageda-user AT delorie DOT com]" writes: >> >> >> >>>> >My experience has always been that hard to read spaghetti code is the >> >>>> >result of dealing with special cases that arise from having data structures >> >>>> >and functions that weren't designed quite right. Making things more generic >> >>>> >reduces the number of special cases and allows for the maximum reuse of >> >>>> >structures and functions. >> >>>> > >> >>>> >As I stated in my opening remark, feel free to take or leave my >> >>>> >suggestions. Obviously I think it would be wise to heed them >> >>> So do I. >> >> >> >> OK. If having generic containers for data about a pc board and an >> >> assembly of parts onto it helps coding >> >> be easy let's do that. Naming and documentation needs help in PCB. >> >> It's highly unlikely it'll be easier for just BBVias. I believe >> there's already an experimental branch that implements them. Igor is >> likely to decide to implement them again while we all talk about it. >> For containers to pay off several other applications for them would >> need to exist and be important enough to get implemented. What are >> they? >> >> Britton > > Stephan Böttcher posted a good plan a few days ago: Yes, I read it > The aim should be to change PCB in small incremental steps. > > - Remove the assumption that all layers except "outline" are conductive. > - Make implicit layers explicit and allow to draw on them, soldermask, solderpaste. > - Allow more/all things inside Elements, on explicit layers. This one in particular is not a small incremental step but a fairly drastic change. A lot of work is likely to be required to fix all the points that make assumptions about Elements. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but it's hard. > - Use a mapping from Library layer names to Layout layer names. > - Allow to draw negative objects. Add drawing depth to the objects. > - Represent the implicit objects explicitly, clearances, soldermask, solderpaste. > - Make Vias more like Elements. > > First change the data structures, and update the tools do exactly what Yes in principle, but for BBVia the existing structures don't necessarily have to change. A new type can just be added. Then you have to ensure that that new type interacts correctly, but you don't have to audit everything that uses, say, Elements. Britton