Hi Seth,
I tried to test your patch. It bascially works. Some observations follows:
I think the message printed from cmake
"from /opt/oce/lib/libTKernel.so I found /opt/oce/lib"
should be removed from the output, it looks liek a debug message to me. I
guess the same information is available in
OK, for your guys’ (re)viewing pleasure, a patch which losslessly round-trips stuff it doesn’t understand.
0001-Lossless-round-tripping-of-unknown-constructs.patch
Description: Binary data
On 16 Mar 2018, at 19:15, hauptmech wrote:While i would still like to see this (my)
I’ve always considered a jagged feature envelope a design bug. I’d support
adding the via checkbox.
Cheers,
Jeff.
> On 18 Mar 2018, at 15:31, Jon Evans wrote:
>
> I tested these patches and they work fine for me. I also think it's great to
> add the via filtering
I tested these patches and they work fine for me. I also think it's great
to add the via filtering checkbox, because I was just in need of that
feature on a layout a few days ago...
But I will defer to Wayne on whether or not this should go in for rc2.
-Jon
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 12:32 PM,
Committed, thanks!
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:42 AM, Carsten Schoenert
wrote:
> Am 17.03.2018 um 20:21 schrieb Carsten Schoenert:
> > Is this somehow intended that these needed macros are removed in the
> > file common/dialog_about/AboutDialog_main.cpp?
> > Are there any
There’s no good reason these are edited in separate dialogs, right? It’s just
a historical artefact?
(Note that I’m not suggesting a single list, just a single dialog with both
lists.)
Thanks,
Jeff.
___
Mailing list:
Am 17.03.2018 um 20:21 schrieb Carsten Schoenert:
> Is this somehow intended that these needed macros are removed in the
> file common/dialog_about/AboutDialog_main.cpp?
> Are there any more files to look at?
>
> Btw: The hyperlink to the libraries needs too be reworked too.
I'm answering myself
2018-03-18 11:09 GMT+02:00 hauptmech :
>
>
> For the case of someone with modules composed only of non-top/bottom
> elements and who are messing with the layer setup midway through the
> design, I think we should just leave it as it is. Either they are a ninja
> doing things
Updated patch attached. Coding standard stuff fixed.
I took a second look at the case where all items in a module are deleted.
I checked the parser and writer. In the case where all items are
deleted, the modules are still OK as far as reading and writing to the file.
I don't think deleting
9 matches
Mail list logo