MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201207071529.q67FTdlm006386@envy.delorie.com>
References: <CACPio-4Ve75nB97dSTA2mh6RBCY9HNd3JaLUNVQ=WtkUVfY1WA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1341673236 DOT 2450 DOT 4 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
	<1341674662 DOT 2794 DOT 5 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
	<201207071529 DOT q67FTdlm006386 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 12:29:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CACPio-7rP9XaQQCSOWLUQgX65JjjLMJGxdb2AUmpxW9rYRwo4A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Route style defaults
From: Nathan Stewart <therealnathanstewart AT gmail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

Edit->Route Styles does not Edit anything. It only selects the current
route style, for which there is a always displayed radio box.

Hide Everything isn't simply coddling users. It's also known as
'abstraction', and is a welcome departure from the days of Xfig. I do
think that the trace widths of the four routing styles are
conceptually related to the Design Rules though. If I were to switch
fab houses or switch to a four layer board (which has different rules
at batchpcb), then I'd likely want them to change with the new rules.

Can the optimizer handle polygons? or just traces? I was able to
reduce the complex hole in my polygon by playing the the clearance
around traces and pads, but it still has a lot of ugliness remaining
in the polygon.