X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=E5mA3z96LfH3iGp0xLyxYsi/LlNBgO5n2mSDrHsm53k=;
	b=GLIkIHZYwsZhfFQZ85EAFBe/SJRuq0PVH8ueE3EsfjMjFUOSl7JrZovGYL3TBy7RIP
	hEglMPlyYUohFDmPejnhHbop9Zb0h/ba72uKAvr5lcLyBDWsG+/oEGHErE+j8UjmNlOR
	hn0omkXZj6RnunNTqsxacurM9hWcO6yJznrupu1ArJ3ZxoeybKcqR/e65xiPAuY+4Ebn
	mK8V6sZkofiw/AMCvwMMNFa66rJlhEYagBsDay3VrOi+9Ss9nKXN4qjTIXZ1sChYGL56
	t89juCKf8ljEwWoscaB3IXxE1ZXFReqJl+pdF/uL3u/yiM7/Um+Z6YnFscLbaoaD/RSX
	5TMQ==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.180.39.193 with SMTP id r1mr3872176wik.57.1443912478883;
	Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:47:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<560F9BE2.80104@jump-ing.de>
References:	<CAC4O8c_kjtsHhyjH+fPZvhDdPxc+Z+L5RxPy4SpJ8dmcGNKMiA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<munf8m$u7l$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
	<560F9BE2 DOT 80104 AT jump-ing DOT de>
Date:	Sat, 3 Oct 2015 14:47:58 -0800
Message-ID:	<CAC4O8c_5VZa+xN-KmUZTnoP3q+dFuxm1QNmW1gmp1m0v-1NM6A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] making DRC less misleading in the presence of shorts,
	non-routed rats, etc.
From:	"Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

--001a11c2b93064089e05213b12ab
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Markus Hitter (mah AT jump-ing DOT de) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

> Am 03.10.2015 um 04:41 schrieb Kai-Martin Knaak:
> > You mean a use case where the user manually deletes long range rats to
> > get a better feel for the local situation? IMHO, a delete is already a
> > crutch in itself.
>
> Generated rat lines are only a hint. If one deletes them, they'll
> re-appear on the next "optmize rats", so they're not really "deleted".
>

Yeah, but if the user has already taken trouble to make sure that only the
rats they want to work on routing at the moment are shown, it's obnoxious
to trash that rat set and show the whole mess again, or make them go
through the selection process a second time.

--001a11c2b93064089e05213b12ab
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Markus Hitter (<a href=3D"mailto:mah AT ju=
mp-ing.de">mah AT jump-ing DOT de</a>) [via <a href=3D"mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT co=
m">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>] <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:geda-=
user AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>&gt;</span> wr=
ote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border=
-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">Am 03.10.2015 um 04=
:41 schrieb Kai-Martin Knaak:<br>
&gt; You mean a use case where the user manually deletes long range rats to=
<br>
&gt; get a better feel for the local situation? IMHO, a delete is already a=
<br>
&gt; crutch in itself.<br>
<br>
</span>Generated rat lines are only a hint. If one deletes them, they&#39;l=
l<br>
re-appear on the next &quot;optmize rats&quot;, so they&#39;re not really &=
quot;deleted&quot;.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div style=3D"">Yeah, bu=
t if the user has already taken trouble to make sure that only the rats the=
y want to work on routing at the moment are shown, it&#39;s obnoxious to tr=
ash that rat set and show the whole mess again, or make them go through the=
 selection process a second time.</div><div>=C2=A0</div></div></div></div>

--001a11c2b93064089e05213b12ab--

- Raw text -