Re: gEDA-user: pcb crooked traces

[Andrew Poelstra <asp11@xxxxxx>]

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:45:45AM -0400, Rick Collins wrote:
>                 OR... the tool can be changed to remove the
> limitation by using 1 nm as the base unit which can represent both
> metric and inches ***WITHOUT ANY LOSS OF PRECISION***.  It is that
> simple.  Why adopt a messy, complex, error prone solution when a
> solution is available that deals with the problem simply, accurately
> and permanently?
>

I think we have all agreed to use nm as the base unit. Karl is arguing
the merits of floating point versus integer math as an entirely separate
issue.

Personally, I don't see the point. Rounding to the nearest nm is easy
to understand and more than precise enough for any non-CPU-core work
(and even then..). Floating point is not so easy to understand, because
you are rounding to a floating degree of precision -- which will nearly
always be sufficient, but still hard to calculate.

Plus, floating point is scary. That's a real argument, because it
affects developer confidence in the code, confuses analysis, and
might discourage future developers.


Andrew
 


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