[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: [PATCH] Add line end to line type dialog

Is it correct, that round linestyle is default because of its superior
mechanical/thermal properties? - I definitely read this for pads and
it's easy to imagine, that a corner more easily delaminates than a round
edge. In the light of this, a "small bend" corner style would be cool ;-)

Peter Clifton wrote:

On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 22:08 +0200, Krzysztof KoÅciuszkiewicz wrote:

You're right, this was done without too much thought.  I'll try to
rewrite this and resubmit - unless you think that the core of this
patch
(having an option to edit line end style) is moot...


Round vs. square is probably interesting, and we need to think how it
applies to path objects as well. Those may need a corner joint type
specifying as well.

How does it stack up with dash/dot line styles. These basically override
the line-end type in the existing implementation, so the line-end type
really only applies to solid lines (and perhaps adjusting the exact
end-point of the square dashed lines).

I'm inclined to consider the "END_SQUARE / END_ROUND" types (both leave
the inked end-point the same, and if we can get away with it.. "ban"
then END_NONE type, which could otherwise be achieved by adjusting the
position of a line with the END_SQUARE type.



_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user