Re: gEDA-user: Toporouter Changes

[Bill Gatliff <bgat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony Blake wrote:
> John Griessen wrote:
>   
>>   Seems like the force-field approach
>>     
>>> just tweaks his "better" definition based on user input and not just the 
>>> board geometrics.
>>>       
>> Right.  To move in one direction from a point that repels is one way to code such a function.
>> Another would be a straight line, and even better, a hand drawn line-segment line
>> carving out regions of circuitry that should stay some distance away from eachother.
>> Then rerun the program with wider DRC rules for the next region to pack against the first. and so on.
>>     
>
> I would prefer to implement this sort of functionality with topological 
> directives or constraints, and avoid geometric constraints if possible.
>   

Kind of like providing the circuit-board equivalent of a geological
topographical/relief map, so the algorithms know where the "valleys"
(preferred paths) and "peaks" (mountains, don't climb them unless
necessary) are?  And the lakes, airports, Area 51's, etc....  Except
that with circuit boards it would be more than 3-D, because some of the
mountains would be abstract things like excessive trace length (which
might later trigger the addition of a via and then a retry), DRC rules,
desire to avoid the extreme edges of the board, and so on...  An [n]-D
"relief map"...

Ok, that's about all that I can contribute to the idea.  Love the work,
and obviously totally unqualified to do any of it.  :)



b.g.

-- 
Bill Gatliff
bgat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




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