Sure, I'm happy to help review.

This still wont solve the problem for the lesstif or gdk HIDs though, only= the GL hid.

--Chad

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT co= m) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com<= /a>] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

On 19 Feb 2017 19:51, "Chad = Parker (parke= r DOT charles AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
The problem with the code right now is that pins and pads do= n't actually exist on layers, they are separate. So, turning off a laye= r has no effect on pins or pads. Does your 3D stuff also rework that aspect= of pins/pads/vias and the layer code?
=

No, but it rewor= ks the rendering stack extensively... for 3D view, it renders much more lik= e a physical exporter than the traditional "gui" pipeline imposed= by draw.c

Any guess as to when i= t will arrive?
<= /div>

Not e= xactly, but it is certainly high on my non - work related goals list for th= is year to see that code merged. (It has been out of mainline way too long)= .

I can probably point y= ou to a few bits and pieces where I could use help and code review if you l= ike. I'm mid-attempt at rebasing the old patch series against HEAD, and= one area which could really help (as I'm currently not designing any b= oards), is test-driving the result to validate the rebase.

Peter
<= font color=3D"#888888">
--Chad
<= /font>

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 2:25 PM= , Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <ged= a-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
=
Hi Chad,

(Mo= ving to geda-user as this is not directly answering the OP question)

The later 3D stuff will help whe= n it lands. There is a more physical view mode where turning off individual= layers also hides any features on that layer such as pads etc..

Otoh... the fact OP is having issu= es makes me wonder if they have GL enabled or not. Transparency helps.

Peter

Peter

<= /div>

On 19 Feb 20= 17 19:19, "Chad Parker (parker DOT charles AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-help AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT c= om> wrote:
<= div>
It took me a sec, but I figured out what he means.=C2=A0He= 9;s turning off the pins/pads so that they're not in the way while he&#= 39;s routing on inner layers.

The problem is that when you turn off the pins/pads, it turns them off for=20 all layers. On the inner layers a plated thru-hole will (often) have a=20 circuilar pad around it, not to mention that there is actually a hole=20 through the board. With pins/pads off, there is no indication of this=20 this at all and you can route a trace straight through a through-hole=20 with out realizing it (or on the top or bottom layer too, actually).
Hence the feature's he's asking for. If you could turn off s= urface mount pads without turning off pins, then this wouldn't be a pro= blem. Or, if we had an "online-DRC" that would prevent you from d= rawing things that violated design rules, it would also prevent you from do= ing this.

The quickest fix for this, I think, is to change thi= ngs slightly so that pins and vias are grouped together for visibility and = pads are their own separate "layer". The right way to do this pro= bably involves reworking the layer system, but this is a pretty quick hack = that should work for now.

I opened a bug report on Launc= hPad: https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/1666052

--Ch= ad

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 3:25 AM, Smilie (smilie AT posteo DOT de) [via geda-help AT delorie DOT com] <geda-help AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
I think, PCB need some additional features:

1. split PIN/PAD Layer in two Buttons PIN and PAD.
2. make it possible, that the "auto enforce DRC clearance" works = also
while moving lines.

3. the algorithm for "auto enforce DRC clearance" could be modifi= ed,
that the line will be lay around the barrier?

Am Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:28:44 +0000

schrieb "P= eter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) [via
geda-help AT delori= e.com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT com>:

> I think I'll have to try that to understand properly; but if you m= ean
> - you accidentally shorted against pins which you had switched off
> visibility for... Not sure how to avoid that fully.
>
> Perhaps need to separate the view controls a little more. In my later<= br> > 3D stuff (available on repo.or.cz), in 3D view turning off any layer
> also hides things like copper pads on that layer.
>
> Peter
>
> Peter
>
> On 15 Feb 2017 15:19, "Smilie (smilie AT posteo DOT de) [via
> geda-help AT d= elorie.com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
> > Am Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:48:02 +0000
> > schrieb "Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) [via=
> > geda-h= elp AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT com>:
> >
> > >=C2=A0 Any chance you can post a screenshot of what you descr= ibe?
> > >
> > > (Imagebin.ca or similar if the files are big?)
> > >
> > > On 15 Feb 2017 10:45, "Smilie (smilie AT posteo DOT de) [via
> > > g= eda-help AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello guys,
> > > >
> > > > if i have an Jumper connected through all layers.
> > > > But if i disable the view of all layers, apart from a i= nner
> > > > signal-layer, the contacts of the connected through is = not
> > > > visible. This is in my opinion a bug.
> > > > Or what is this feature for?
> > > >
> > > > lg
> > > >
> >
> >
> > OK, i see the Failure, but i will explain the situation.
> >
> >
> > Step by step:
> >
> > 1. create a new pcb.
> >
> > 2. Load a Jumper1 and place it to the board.
> >
> > 3. Take also some SMD-footprints an place it free over the board.=
> >
> > Now you wont draw a line in a (signal) middle layer, but the
> > SMD-Footprints are worry. Because this you make some layers
> > invisible.
> >
> > 4. Now you make the pins/pads invisible. Or what?
> >
> > But, you can not free draw the middle layer, because you have
> > collisions with footprints like Jumper1.
> >
> >
> >