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=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=arFm5/XK0o5hFTV7gXqd94vvfIkcPddMB06E/aJIXhY=; b=vWm205rQb5oB6bKcgLtLon/+PHVXxkQoZdI9JioEozYyElSLrbkgasPJD2XzsdB0JP cOgGDGvFR38U6cimTzDj56cFQDNKKMlRyET9JpeOabBb3SQMRGpbjBSRpQsWKwgOkEZe wl7K12L7TvaabBVDZF4gmRsUEM2YlLmrrokQChToxHA0F3bFVGXW5p59HWaM40nYdvDD 2LR9M82EQntRNfwIn1HoHAXw7hPSNXt5Vjo5ZT3AstKYnbusECZLIyp4acWSNq0Om3K0 z64YvN5xqbAqsLhjL/Lz/YeV+trOXRwWznEJSIfJOupBHIJlbWbXiErewGnFHMfKTE9M A1Rg== X-Received: by 10.180.208.82 with SMTP id mc18mr25781574wic.85.1445950864419; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 06:01:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 14:01:02 +0100 From: "Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] home/bkerin/geometry_module branch Message-Id: <20151027140102.5c4fb49a2a26bd4b70f6d61c@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20151027103752 DOT 17300 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <20151027121151 DOT 84a401be8b0d162eea027ad9 AT gmail DOT com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 > >Okay people... sorry. Calm down. > > No worries, I'm totally calm (I use pcb-rnd, and none of these ideas > affect that fork). > > > > >Let us start a technical discussion. > > > >Igor2: I didn't want to reflect your other points. > > > >There is for exaple distance calculation code, polygon handling, so for > >example we could detect polygons that are fully covered by another one. That > >is only one thing. > >But there are others. > > I think we should go the other way around. First enumerate what exactly is > needed to clean up the current code at the parts where things are > happening nowdays (Britton is in a good position for that, I think). Then > enumerate what's needed to clean up other parts of the code, like the poly > dicer or the toporouter. Finally enumerate what kind of plans PCB has for > the future and what features could potentially help those. > > Once there's a list, it makes sense to evaluate libs, see if they provide > all items on the list and how much extra (useful stuff or bloat) they > would bring in. If it turns out there's no good deal with existing libs, > don't be affraid to roll our own. > > Picking a lib without these steps seems unreasonable to me. > > Regards, > > Igor2 Agree. What I now about is about: Draw different primitives which probably are the same as in Gerber, calculate distance between edges of primitives, calculate which objects overlap and hence form a physical net according to ohms law, calculate narrowest passage between different points for minimum trace width. Nicklas Karlsson