Hi Glen, Yes I've already raised the (potential) issue of the real-time computation cost of the length tuning rules - it's essentially an O(MxN) algorithm (M = number of rules, N = number of PCB items), which does worry me from a scaling point of view as people hopefully develop more complex boards as the high speed tools develop. As you say there are various mitigations to this: worker threads, intelligent caching, pre-computation, etc etc. All stuff to consider.
Yours, James. On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 at 21:58, Glen English <glenenglish1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi James. Yeah I agree text based rule core is a fine way of representing > it. > What we will find is that as the rule base grows, the online DRC > functions will start chewing considerable processor resources- it will > likely need to be spun out into another low priority thread. > Maybe the plain english rule base language will need to be tokenized in > the background to reduce the text parsing load of rule threads. (maybe it > already is I dont know) > There is a desire by many users to bring more of the rule base into real > time "online" space, IE many things I beleive should be examined as the > user places tracks, via etc - so that it does not need to be cleaned up > later (big productivity issue ) and so how this is done and how > efficienctly under the hood will begin to matter. > -glen > > On Saturday, March 2, 2024 at 8: > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KiCad Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to devlist+unsubscr...@kicad.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/kicad.org/d/msgid/devlist/CAMVX%3DtYeJiXV4Y0jvLPqzy8fH%2BTMJhbdU7hNvM39%2BGmk5xoxdQ%40mail.gmail.com.
