Re: gEDA-user: OR components screwed on postscript output

[Ales Hvezda <ahvezda@seul.org>]

Hi,


>When I make a schematic with for example a 7400 component, the schematic
>looks good in gschem but the postscript generated has all the rounded
>part too thin, and the upper right arc is wrong, it goes about 90 to 360


	I noticed the thinner arcs before, but attributed that 
ghostscript rendering quirk, but now I'll investigate that a bit more.
Yeah, there's a bug here.  I'll fix this tonight.

	However the arcs going the wrong direction was fixed (dealt with
mirroring and rotating an arc).  The fix is in CVS right now.
Since people are bringing up known bugs, it's time for a new release.
I'll get something out this weekend.


>BTW, looking at the postscript generated by gschem, I would say that it
>is fairly simple. It would be advantageous to emphasize the fact that
>postscript is a programming language, and that gschem describes objects,
>to generate more sophisticated postscript code, i.e. instead of stroking
>each single line, arc and box, define functions for each components and
>reuse them. This would make much more compact postscript, and allow
>easier postprocessing of files.


	Agreed that more optimized/sophisticated PS code is easier to
postprocess.  Yes, the postscript output is simplistic.  I did that on
purpose for two reasons: 1) it was really easy to do it the way I did
it and 2) I wanted people to be able to just look at the PS file and
be able to tell what's going on right away.  Reason #2 is lame now.
I'm always open to contributions on optimizing the PS output.


>
>Of course that would change the printing model as far as I can see from
>sources...


	Somewhat, but certainly this is not an impossible task.

								-Ales