Re: gEDA-user: General Layers questions

[Jared Casper <jaredcasper@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Martin Kupec <martin.kupec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If layers types would be defined by attributes, someone would be able to
> declare one layer both as conductive and as silk for example. That could
> cause me a nighmares. That is why I insist on 'typed' layers, not
> 'tagged' layer.
>
> That example is probably silly, but someone would probably come up with
> something more realistic, but still giving me nightmares.
>

But what if I want a silk layer to just be a copy of a copper layer?
That may be just as silly, but I'm sure someone could come up with a
use for it.  Why would such a layer cause nightmares?  When the code
is worried about connectivity etc., it sees this layer is tagged as
conductive and includes it in whatever its doing, ignoring the fact
that it is also silk.  When the code is putting out the silkscreen, it
notices this layer is tagged as silk and puts it out, ignoring that it
is also a conductive layer.

Jared


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