DJ Delorie wrote: > --as-shown determines whether you use the layer stack as shown, or the > layer stack as defined by the pcb. It's a "what's on top" setup.
. . . > The core needs to know the stackup, but it doesn't need to know the > orientation. Exporting as shown vs. stack up seems tricky. What's "selectable or viewable on top on screen" is ignored by gerber or PS separate layer outputs, but well used by PS merged together output for assembly drawings. Without some consistent rule, command line options could have confusing effects. As shown and as stacked are reasonable terms to talk about it... if we had command line options --as-shown --as-stacked they should change whatever is visible on screen at the time they are asked by a command line input to a running pcb or a HID dialog input. In other words, print/export what you see right now always so as to avoid confusion. I can't remember if the command line options even deal with HID solder or component view as they are now... DJ Delorie wrote: > The whole problem of "physical stack" is something we're working on > separately. I think we've agreed that the physical stack is > determined by the layer *group* order, from the "component" group > through the "solder" group. This breaks when you have copper outside > those two, like "component, solder, signal1, signal2" but oh well. We can have top and bottom to handle such stack ups. Shouldn't get stuck on anything like "normal" board stack -- allow weird stacks with printed conductors and semiconductors. John Griessen -- Ecosensory Austin TX _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
