2016-04-12 8:34 GMT+02:00 Lorenzo Marcantonio :
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 07:58:05AM +1000, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>
>> a) ability to use "." or "," regardless of the language setting - assuming
>> no sensible person ever enters a thousands separator in CAD software
>> (I don't know any CAD softwar
On 4/12/2016 2:34 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 07:58:05AM +1000, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>
>> a) ability to use "." or "," regardless of the language setting - assuming
>> no sensible person ever enters a thousands separator in CAD software
>> (I don't know any CAD softw
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 07:58:05AM +1000, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> a) ability to use "." or "," regardless of the language setting - assuming
> no sensible person ever enters a thousands separator in CAD software
> (I don't know any CAD software which accepts thousands separators).
Already doing
I agree that a new wxValidator is the best way to go. From discussions
on IRC, people have been asking for:
a) ability to use "." or "," regardless of the language setting - assuming
no sensible person ever enters a thousands separator in CAD software
(I don't know any CAD software which accepts t
On 4/11/2016 2:16 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 10:37:43AM -0400, Chris Pavlina wrote:
>> Anyone mind if I go through and fix the "in 0.1 degrees" units that are all
>> over pcbnew? I don't see any reason why we can't let the user enter unit
>> degrees with a decimal poin
On 4/11/2016 11:01 AM, Tomasz Wlostowski wrote:
> On 11.04.2016 16:57, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>> On 4/11/2016 10:39 AM, jp charras wrote:
>>> Le 11/04/2016 16:07, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
On 4/11/2016 9:43 AM, jp charras wrote:
> Le 11/04/2016 15:12, Nick Østergaard a écrit :
>> In ad
On 11.04.2016 16:57, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> On 4/11/2016 10:39 AM, jp charras wrote:
>> Le 11/04/2016 16:07, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
>>> On 4/11/2016 9:43 AM, jp charras wrote:
Le 11/04/2016 15:12, Nick Østergaard a écrit :
> In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts
On 4/11/2016 10:39 AM, jp charras wrote:
> Le 11/04/2016 16:07, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
>> On 4/11/2016 9:43 AM, jp charras wrote:
>>> Le 11/04/2016 15:12, Nick Østergaard a écrit :
In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts units. We
already have the feature to enter
Le 11/04/2016 16:07, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
> On 4/11/2016 9:43 AM, jp charras wrote:
>> Le 11/04/2016 15:12, Nick Østergaard a écrit :
>>> In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts units. We
>>> already have the feature to enter 42.34 mm even if you are in inch
>>> mode globa
On 4/11/2016 9:43 AM, jp charras wrote:
> Le 11/04/2016 15:12, Nick Østergaard a écrit :
>> In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts units. We
>> already have the feature to enter 42.34 mm even if you are in inch
>> mode globally. With the wxvalidator you can not enter letters a
On 2016-04-11 15:12, Nick Østergaard wrote:
> In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts units. We
> already have the feature to enter 42.34 mm even if you are in inch
> mode globally. With the wxvalidator you can not enter letters at all,
> and hence not the unit.
+1
And... an
Le 11/04/2016 15:12, Nick Østergaard a écrit :
> In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts units. We
> already have the feature to enter 42.34 mm even if you are in inch
> mode globally. With the wxvalidator you can not enter letters at all,
> and hence not the unit.
For this fe
Yup, the validator system is very slick, I like it. I'm liking a lot of this
new wx dialog stuff, which is interesting considering how much I otherwise
dislike wx :D
I'll have a look and see if it's been fixed upstream, though honestly if not,
the wxFloatingPointValidator is so simple it's probabl
Please use validators! This goes along with my announcement about our
dialog design. Take look at the wxWidgets validator sample so you
understand how transferring data to and from the dialog controls is
designed in wxWidgets. Done correctly, it will greatly simplify our
dialog code.
Maybe you
Making a derivative entry box is silly. If wxFloatingPointValidator is broken
we should make a new wxValidator, not a new entry box, as that is the idiomatic
way to do this in wx. I'm sure Wayne would concur on that. I'd have no problem
developing that, too.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:09:33PM +020
In addition I would vote for a proper validator that accepts units. We
already have the feature to enter 42.34 mm even if you are in inch
mode globally. With the wxvalidator you can not enter letters at all,
and hence not the unit.
2016-04-11 15:09 GMT+02:00 jp charras :
> Le 11/04/2016 14:10, Chr
Le 11/04/2016 14:10, Chris Pavlina a écrit :
> ...why would I make some special entry box for this? What's wrong with what
> I've already done?
Nothing really wrong, but:
* At least on Windows, wxFloatingPointValidator does not work fine:
- as long you are using the default language, it works.
...why would I make some special entry box for this? What's wrong with what
I've already done?
On Apr 11, 2016 2:18 AM, "Lorenzo Marcantonio"
wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 10:37:43AM -0400, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> > Anyone mind if I go through and fix the "in 0.1 degrees" units that are
> all
>
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 10:37:43AM -0400, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> Anyone mind if I go through and fix the "in 0.1 degrees" units that are all
> over pcbnew? I don't see any reason why we can't let the user enter unit
> degrees with a decimal point.
Probably stems for avoiding floats around the code
I just fixed three of them. If there are others, I didn't see them, so please
point them out to me.
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 07:47:28PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Great! Thanks for fixing this. It's been a long time coming.
>
> On 4/9/2016 4:20 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> > wxFloatingPointVa
Great! Thanks for fixing this. It's been a long time coming.
On 4/9/2016 4:20 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> wxFloatingPointValidator was pretty straightforward for this. 6679 switches
> the
> new arbitrary module text angle to FP units, refactors the dialog to use
> TransferDataToWindow, and clean
wxFloatingPointValidator was pretty straightforward for this. 6679 switches the
new arbitrary module text angle to FP units, refactors the dialog to use
TransferDataToWindow, and cleans up the arbitrary angle patch a bit. I'll
continue doing this with the other 0.1deg fields.
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016
Awesome, I'm starting on that now.
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 02:36:49PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> We've being talking about this for a long time so I would like to see
> this implemented. Entering 900 for 90.0 degrees really doesn't make
> much sense. You may have to write your own validator
We've being talking about this for a long time so I would like to see
this implemented. Entering 900 for 90.0 degrees really doesn't make
much sense. You may have to write your own validator if
wxFloatingPointValidator does not meet your needs. I haven't used
wxFloatingPointValidator so I don't
The others also have a minimum resolution too, unless you think you can align
things to femtometers ;)
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 03:38:08AM +1200, Simon Wells wrote:
> do they not have the difference of being limited to only 1 decimal
> place unlike the others though?
>
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 3:
do they not have the difference of being limited to only 1 decimal
place unlike the others though?
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> Values already have to be validated. The only issue I can think of is related
> to the decimal point / comma issue, but we're *already* accept
Values already have to be validated. The only issue I can think of is related
to the decimal point / comma issue, but we're *already* accepting decimal
points in values in other fields in the same dialogs (for positional offsets,
for instance). I figure it should be fine as long as they're handled
This was seen in a previous thread iirc and wayne mentioned that
someone would need to write it so that it verified values were entered
correctly etc
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 2:37 AM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> Anyone mind if I go through and fix the "in 0.1 degrees" units that are all
> over pcbnew?
Anyone mind if I go through and fix the "in 0.1 degrees" units that are all
over pcbnew? I don't see any reason why we can't let the user enter unit
degrees with a decimal point.
--
Chris
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post t
29 matches
Mail list logo
