On 04/28/2013 11:58 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:40:07PM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Client code is simply that which makes calls to an interface, a class user.
I don't see a problem if an interface is richer than its clients need.
Since you changed the
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 01:32:40AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Bullshit. just call the interface with the right argument.
Strange for someone that just a few days ago lamented for 'too many
bugs' in kicad...
Sure. *Call* the interface with the *right* argument. The keyword is
*call*. It's
On 04/29/2013 02:40 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 01:32:40AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Bullshit. just call the interface with the right argument.
Please state the file and line number please.
The rest is bullshit.
Strange for someone that just a few days ago
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 02:56:47AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Please state the file and line number please.
OK, one example:
In PCB_BASE_FRAME::GlobalChange_PadSettings (pcbnew/globaleditpad.cpp)
on line 232 pad_orient is computed from the pad orientation and the
module orientation.
Le 29/04/2013 10:39, Lorenzo Marcantonio a écrit :
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 02:56:47AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Please state the file and line number please.
OK, one example:
In PCB_BASE_FRAME::GlobalChange_PadSettings (pcbnew/globaleditpad.cpp)
on line 232 pad_orient is computed from
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:02:58AM +0200, jp charras wrote:
In new code, orientations are (slowly) moved from int to double. to
allow a better resolution than 0.1 degree, *in the future*.
If the decision to allow more than 0.1 degree is taken, dialogs *and
documentation* need to be updated
On Apr 29, 2013 4:21 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio l.marcanto...@logossrl.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:02:58AM +0200, jp charras wrote:
In new code, orientations are (slowly) moved from int to double. to
allow a better resolution than 0.1 degree, *in the future*.
If the decision to
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 07:43:30AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Attach a bad board file if you want your code review, the sky is falling, C
programmer mentality, bug report, to be perceived as anything but bullshit.
Your grammar fails me, or, better I fail to understand you. Maybe my
english
I was comparing my tree with the master one. These are some changes
I did in times and I would like what do you think of these
- GenDate() at the moment uses a fixed format (more or less the european
one), with the months hardcoded to the short english names.
Wouldn't it be better to use the
On 04/28/2013 06:41 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
I was comparing my tree with the master one. These are some changes
I did in times and I would like what do you think of these
- GenDate() at the moment uses a fixed format (more or less the european
one), with the months hardcoded to the
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 08:09:29AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
GenDate() is not my function, so I could only offer an opinion but no
protective mandate.
I am neutral, and to formulate a strong opinion would require a study of its
usage, for
which I do not have the time.
AFAIK mostly
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 03:33:32PM +0200, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
AFAIK mostly reports and sheet border. I'll investigate.
Correction, it's *only* for the title block. The default (%x)
formatting (for the italian locale, at least) is numeric only
(like dd/mm/) so it's *very* easy to
Le 28/04/2013 13:41, Lorenzo Marcantonio a écrit :
I was comparing my tree with the master one. These are some changes
I did in times and I would like what do you think of these
- GenDate() at the moment uses a fixed format (more or less the european
one), with the months hardcoded to the
.
On Apr 28, 2013 8:31 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio l.marcanto...@logossrl.com
wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 08:09:29AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
GenDate() is not my function, so I could only offer an opinion but no
protective mandate.
I am neutral, and to formulate a strong opinion would
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 03:50:09PM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
The interface is correct. Setting any angle is desired. The implentation
is insufficient in this case. The black box is broken and needs
embellishment.
I chose what the dog is to do when we started the plugins. The tail is
On Apr 28, 2013 11:09 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio l.marcanto...@logossrl.com
wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 03:50:09PM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
The interface is correct. Setting any angle is desired. The
implentation
is insufficient in this case. The black box is broken and needs
On Apr 28, 2013 11:19 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote:
On Apr 28, 2013 11:09 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio
l.marcanto...@logossrl.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 03:50:09PM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
The interface is correct. Setting any angle is desired. The
implentation
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:19:02PM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Can you name the class where setangle, the interface, cannot successfully
set an angle of any degree, without talking about client code?
No, I didn't look for it, but the compiler flagged that (innocuous) swap
so there *could* be
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:40:07PM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
Client code is simply that which makes calls to an interface, a class user.
I don't see a problem if an interface is richer than its clients need.
Since you changed the specifications (an angle can be arbitrary) the
client needs
19 matches
Mail list logo
