Re: gEDA-user: wishful UI

[Andrew Poelstra <asp11@xxxxxx>]

On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 09:55:32AM -0500, John Griessen wrote:
> Andrew Poelstra wrote:
> >On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 12:51:34AM +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
>  The classes of nets can be marked by colors, we go on
> >>until all nets have the correct class.
> >>
> >
> >Do we want each net to have one class? Or would it be useful for nets
> >to be "tagged" with multiple classes? Probably not, but it's something
> >to think about.
> 
> I can think of reasons to have a trace routed one way in a zone, and change
> design rules to satisfy some constraint like pin distance apart at a chip.
> The way to handle that concept is allow part of a trace to be in one set,
> and another part to be in another and use the less restrictive DRC on the
> place where the two kinds touch.   See below for implementation ideas.
>

I think that we should store actual information in terms of attributes,
as John Goty suggested. Classes would just be a way of organizing groups
of attributes. So there's no good reason not to allow multiple classes.
 
> >
> >Right now the trace color shows the physical layer of the trace, which
> >helps you determine where everything is, and to prevent shorts. I'm sure
> >you'll agree preventing shorts is the most important DRC rule of all :).
> >I don't think we want to override trace color for anything.
> 
> [jg] You're thinking of the many use cases PCB handles very well for
> someone new at the program Andrew.  You're not new to pcb design.
>

Thanks :) but I'm actually fairly new to both. But I work in embedded
devices and have a lot of PCB designers to talk to.
 
> >What I would suggest is adding a panel to the sidebar that displays
> >information about each trace when you select it - what its net is, what
> >layer it's on, what rules it has, what rules it's breaking.
> 
> I like your planning and use of tags.  If any PCB object is taggable,
> it opens up future searches (and replacements) of wires or copper planes
> or pads or pins.   How are you thinking DRCs for different functional sets
> of objects will work relative to other sets?  I imagine treating everything
> not in the set you are running DRC on as the same is feasible, if you draw
> objects and check design rules in order.  The order to run DRCs will need
> to be widest clearance DRCs first to avoid getting
> functional sets of circuitry too close to each other.  Also the only DRC
> that will work on the set of all objects is the least restrictive -- the
> one requiring the smallest clearances.
> 

Well, the DRC would check all the board's rules - it would just only
show you the ones relevant to the current functional set. Optimally,
I'd like the DRC to be running in real time, perhaps drawing a small
"!" icon or something to indicate mistakes. So the "design rule checker"
would be more like "view design rule errors".

> A way to handle schematic driven work styles like Stefan seems to want is
> to make a PCB plugin to color traces differently, or just temporarily,
> as an aid to using the correct DRC rules as you draw, or autoroute.
>

Rather than using a plugin system, I think we should allow the user
to configure the coloring, assigning drawing parameters like "color",
"brightness" and "opacity" to any net attributes he wishes. Presets
would be stored in $HOME/.pcb .


Andrew




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