On Jan 21, 2010, at 12:28 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: <snip> >> I believe gerbv is the right place for dxf export, since that creates >> a tool that works with any gerber file from any tool. The overall >> tool flow is more logical that way. > > Keep it modular enough, and it could live in PCB as well.. keeping the > CAM export steps all together. Or.. go more modular (and Unix-y?):
The argument for modularity is partly that not everyone designs pcb's with pcb. Intercepting the workflow before the gerber step cuts off those users. The only argument for including the functionality in pcb is short-term coding convenience. In the long run, modularity split along well defined interfaces wins. > > Have a gbr2dxf tool which links against libgerbv to do the work, but > keep it out of gerbv. > Yes, well, I thought of that. I was thinking that a gbr2dxf tool would want some kind of layer selection mechanism, but now that I reflect on it, all the layers are in their own file anyway. So the selection function is simply listing the gerber files on the command line. gbr2dxf could reasonably be a gui-less one-shot tool. Maybe the 2D boolean sub-library of CGAL makes sense for polygon-izing? Or modifying the pcb polygon code to run off of gerbv data structures? -dave _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
