Yes, that's what I am proposing.
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:30 AM Jeff Young wrote:
> At present Preferences holds only app-wide settings. So if we went in
> this direction we’d want to do it en-masse.
>
> On 28 Feb 2020, at 14:48, Jon Evans wrote:
>
> I did mean Preferences but Board Setup wo
At present Preferences holds only app-wide settings. So if we went in this
direction we’d want to do it en-masse.
> On 28 Feb 2020, at 14:48, Jon Evans wrote:
>
> I did mean Preferences but Board Setup would work as well.
> I haven't thought about this *too* hard but (and this is kind of a tan
I did mean Preferences but Board Setup would work as well.
I haven't thought about this *too* hard but (and this is kind of a tangent
from the original topic) I think it might be better to think about
consolidating as many preferences as possible (whether they are global or
project-specific) into s
Oops, probably didn’t read your email carefully enough. You also mentioned
project-level, so I assume you also mean Board Setup, not Preferences.
> On 28 Feb 2020, at 11:26, Jeff Young wrote:
>
> I was thinking Board Settings. Some of them might be project-specific, no?
>
>> On 28 Feb 2020,
I was thinking Board Settings. Some of them might be project-specific, no?
> On 28 Feb 2020, at 02:34, Jon Evans wrote:
>
> I agree settings should be in a different dialog. I kind of think they
> should go in the main preferences window as another entry (there will be
> multiple "project le
I agree settings should be in a different dialog. I kind of think they
should go in the main preferences window as another entry (there will be
multiple "project level" preferences panes, so DRC/ERC setup could be part
of that).
That taxonomy of reporting level sounds good to me.
I put my thought
OK, I’m coming around to the idea of a hybrid system (tabs + outline + severity
filtering).
Jon, could you post your violation taxonomy here?
On the settings front, I do actually think they belong in a different dialog (a
la Allegro). But we could have a right-button menu though that takes you
A few thoughts from the peanut gallery...
I strongly agree with Jon here, as a power user of Allegro's Constraint
Manager. It simply _is_ complicated to navigate a full-featured design rule
system. There will (may?) not be a way of getting around that when a lot of
constraints have been added. Add
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:29 AM Jon Evans wrote:
>
> The problem with tabs is that they can only expand so far before you have
> to start scrolling (and so some tabs are not visible).
>
> Yes, that's why I thought a combination of tabs and a tree (or grid as you
said) may be good. There's still f
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 6:04 PM Eeli Kaikkonen
wrote:
> The problem with all tree structure UI's is that they are difficult to
> navigate. The locations of the top level items change based on what is
> opened. There's constant need or at least temptation to open and close
> items. Tabs are always
You’ve got me half-convinced on collapsing the tabs. But there’s one last
issue: running the footprints checks is much slower and so is turned off by
default. We partially mitigate that by displaying “not run” in the Footprints
tab. I suppose we could put the warning as a single item under a F
Coming from the point of view of using commercial tools, I don't really see
the three tabs as different categories.
An unconnected is a violation: it violates the implicit rule that all net
items must be connected. Generally, advanced tools allow you to override
this default rule.
For example, Alt
Now that it’s a tree we could do the 3 level hierarchy pretty easily. In fact,
I started to, but I found it really annoying with my small boards where I
usually only have a handful of errors. That’s when I had the filter checkbox
idea.
I also thought about collapsing the 3 tabs. But they rea
The idea I was kicking around was to build a 2-level tree, with the parents
being these categories (in new drc branch):
https://gitlab.com/kicad/code/kicad/-/blob/drc/pcbnew/drc/drc_violation.h#L31
I think there are much fewer than 64 error types that actually need to be
displayed to the user in gr
I’m looking at adding filtering to the DRC window. I’d like to use something
similar to the HTML report panel where we’d have some checkboxes under the
listbox:
[ ] Show All [ ] Clearances [ ] Constraints [ ] Courtyards
It would be nice and consistent to then have a Save button after that
15 matches
Mail list logo
