Re: gEDA-user: pcb: functions in hidnogui.c

[Peter Clifton <pcjc2@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 04:50 +0100, kai-martin knaak wrote:
> Peter Clifton wrote:
> 
> > Having looked at it, I think it is pretty safe just to remove the CRASH
> > statements in the hidnogui HID. (Both invalidate_lr and invalidate_all).
> > 
> > Alternatively, we would have to provide a NOP implementation of the two
> > invalidate calls in each HID. I'd suggest (if this route is taken),
> > making a new common helpers routine (perhaps rename drawhelpers.c), and
> > provide NOP "common_invalidate_{lr,all}" functions which the non-GUI
> > HIDs can all use.
> > 
> > I've pushed out some groundwork, removing various cruft such as the
> > init_done flag (I think Ineiev had a similar patch), and removing the
> > third, unused invalidate_wh method.
> 
> So, what does this mean for the actions-with-export-HID-patch?
> Do I need to do some polishing? 

I don't think so - although you might need to check how it applies to
hidnogui.c

Make sure there CRASH; statements are removed from both remaining
invalidate methods, and that appropriate comments are made to explain
why.

Alternatively, go the route of providing common_invalidate{lr,all} NOP
functions - but this is rather purist overkill. Perhaps you could cut my
description of this alternative into the commit log of any patch taking
a different route.

"
Peter Clifton:

Alternatively, we would have to provide a NOP implementation of the two
invalidate calls in each HID. I'd suggest (if this route is taken),
making a new common helpers routine (perhaps rename draw_helpers.c), and
provide NOP "common_invalidate_{lr,all}" functions which the non-GUI
HIDs can all use.
"

> > As regards the printing.. I think it would be nice if the exporter HIDs
> > took an explicit command-line parameter to determine which side of the
> > board to export. The PNG exporter already does this for photo-mode.
> 
> Yes, the "bottomside" keyword in the layer stack string is not very user 
> friendly. 

No. In a way, it is a shame we already have so many ways to do things
like this.. not that I'm against flexibility, but it leads to a lot of
code-paths to maintain!

-- 
Peter Clifton

Electrical Engineering Division,
Engineering Department,
University of Cambridge,
9, JJ Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge
CB3 0FA

Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!)
Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me)



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