Re: gEDA-user: General Layers questions

[Stephan Boettcher <boettcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Martin Kupec <martin.kupec@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:11:01PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> 
>> > But if I am doing that (just to extend this silly example too far), I
>> > would want the DRC checker to ensure that it obeys both the rules for
>> > copper _and_ for silk.
>> 
>> Hmmm... DRC is already fab-specific anyway.  Maybe DRC should be on
>> the other side of the CAM job?  I.e. make DRC an exporter, so it gets
>> the layer mappings you want, and can apply rules based on the *mapped*
>> layers, not the *design* layers?
>> 
>> That also lets us code the DRC rules in the CAM job file, so different
>> "jobs" check different rule sets.
>
> I am sorry, but I don't think this is a good idea.
> The DRC should work on the hierarchy. While the exporters will receive
> somewhat 'flattened' stackup.

Absolutely not. The DRC shall check the final flat result.  And yes, the
DRC should be a separate tool examining the CAM output.

OTOH, some DRC functionality inside the layout tool is at least nice to
have, if not required, for doing life checks when editing.  These will
probably never reach the coverage that a final checkout DRC should
provide.  But that is a problem to write such a tool in the first place.

> And I want represent the resulting layer mapping somewhat in the
> stackup, so the exporters will receive how are the layer ordered.
> This should brink some code from the exporters to the core => less code.

This kind of information shall be in the layer attributes.  Ben-mode
image export will need to know that.

-- 
Stephan



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