Good: I like the arrows showing the problem.
Wrong location: The reason (i.e. "Annular rings that are too small may
erode during etching") belongs in the area that you establish the design
rule check guidelines.
Steve Meier
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 16:21 +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> T
Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 10:33 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
>> Peter Clifton wrote:
>>
>>> There isn't a great deal of info on the violation shown, hopefully
>>> zooming to it obviates the need to take up screen-space with coordinate
>>> readouts. (I'd imagine a tooltip, or "Deta
DJ Delorie wrote:
> I like the idea of showing the violation in a window, but do we need
> that many? Maybe something like gschem's symbol selection, where when
> you select a violation it's shown in a window. Tree view lets you group
> violations by type and expand/collapse them:
>
> + drill to
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:34:38PM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 11:33 -0700, Ben Jackson wrote:
> >
> > The dialog can also group by common cause (insufficient clearance, too-small
> > annular ring, etc). Plus it could have buttons like "force annular ring to
> > min size"
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 14:31 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
>
> Even better is to use more than one window to view/edit layout at once.
> How are we on that front? Is the interprocess communication in pcb ready for
> opening
> another window on the same data that is also up to date as data changes?
>
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 11:33 -0700, Ben Jackson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 04:48:39PM +, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> >
> > I like to work with two screens. This would mix well with peters design.
> > The dialog with the list of current violations would sit on the right
> > while the layou
On Mar 29, 2009, at 1:29 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> + drill too small (5)
> + annular ring too small (18)
> - copper areas too close
> + 5.0 mil line/pin at 12500,7500
> + 4.8 mil line/pin at 11500,8500
> + 5.0 mil line/pin at 10500,3250
> + silk over pads (1)
I like this but I suggest a differ
> Even better is to use more than one window to view/edit layout at once.
> How are we on that front?
Nowhere yet. I'd like to update the GUIs to support more than one
drawing window at a time; we have something like that with the pinout
window but it's not generic. Once N windows are supported
> I really like DJs idea of the DRC error layer.
My idea there was to allow PCB to have layers that some parts of the
core just ignored. A DRC layer would be ignored by anything looking
for copper, for example. I hadn't thought about how to interact with
those layers, other than the same way we
I like the idea of showing the violation in a window, but do we need
that many? Maybe something like gschem's symbol selection, where when
you select a violation it's shown in a window. Tree view lets you group
violations by type and expand/collapse them:
+ drill too small (5)
+ annular ring to
Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> If the proposed pop-up contains as much information as the dialog in
> Peters mock-up, it would grow to an annoying size. You'd have to make
> sure, it does not extend off-screen, nor block the view on the actual
> site of violation. IMHO, mouse-over events would be be
Peter Clifton wrote:
some kind of "Press Escape" to zoom back
> out where I was before could be handy after you've fixed the violation.
Even better is to use more than one window to view/edit layout at once.
How are we on that front? Is the interprocess communication in pcb ready for
opening
anot
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 04:48:39PM +, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>
> I like to work with two screens. This would mix well with peters design.
> The dialog with the list of current violations would sit on the right
> while the layout can be dealt with on the left screen.
The dialog can also gr
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 16:21:32 +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
> http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~pcjc2/geda/drc_mockup.png
Very nice.
A few comments:
* Details of the meaning of a type of violation need not be repeated
again and again. This is only interesting when a DRC error is encountered
for the f
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:55:37 -0400, John Luciani wrote:
> I really like DJs idea of the DRC error layer. Place a circle around
> each DRC error on the DRC error layer. When you mouse-over the error
> details could appear.
If the proposed pop-up contains as much information as the dialog in
Peter
This is a lot nicer than the current DRC but I would not present DRC
errors in this manner.
I really like DJs idea of the DRC error layer. Place a circle around
each DRC error on the DRC error layer. When you mouse-over
the error details could appear. Please do not add dialog boxes.
I do not want
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 10:33 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
> Peter Clifton wrote:
>
> > There isn't a great deal of info on the violation shown, hopefully
> > zooming to it obviates the need to take up screen-space with coordinate
> > readouts. (I'd imagine a tooltip, or "Details" pane might make a n
Peter Clifton wrote:
> There isn't a great deal of info on the violation shown, hopefully
> zooming to it obviates the need to take up screen-space with coordinate
> readouts. (I'd imagine a tooltip, or "Details" pane might make a nice
> addition if this was required).
Arrows are good, but need t
18 matches
Mail list logo
