Re: gEDA-user: General Layers questions

[Steven Michalske <smichalske@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 18, 2011, at 2:19 PM, DJ Delorie <dj@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
>> I don't want to end up with the current state that some 'specialy
>> named' layers receive special treatment.
> 
> From a practical standpoint, I think it makes sense to have a fast way
> to scan for layers of some high-level type, as well as further typing
> them by name.
> 
> My original design had an enumerated type for each drawing layer, that
> was one of (for example) "copper, silk, soldermask, paste, outline,
> other" with flags for "normal, inverted" and an assignment to a
> physical layer (1..N).
> 
> That way, when you're doing something compute-intensive like
> connectivity checks for "auto-enforce drc clearance" you aren't doing
> a bazillion string compares.
> 
You can build a hash for storage in ram,  the file format uses strings.  This way you get fast integer math with flexibility of not needing to pre ordain types.  The cost is on import. Where everything is string compairasons.  This is a kind of premature optimization.

Steve

> Actions that are performed less often, like mapping a footprint to an
> element, can use a more open-ended string-attribute with more complex
> rules.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user


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