X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 16:06:17 +0200 (CEST) From: Roland Lutz To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] adventures using arrows (for documentation), or cross my lines In-Reply-To: <20180702125528.D32CF81F76FE@turkos.aspodata.se> Message-ID: References: <20180702125528 DOT D32CF81F76FE AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII 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 Precedence: bulk On Mon, 2 Jul 2018, karl AT aspodata DOT se wrote: > c, use same line width as horiz. line, and use round cap style, i.e. > patch gschem/lepton-schematic so that they honor the cap style entry > which is currently completely ignored and and an undocumented cap > style is used instead (called "miter" in postscript), see [3]. "miter" is a join style, not a cap style. Cap styles are honored in path objects, but they only effect the ends of the path and don't have any effect on closed paths at all. > I'd prefer c to happen, since that would solve other line corner to > straight line situations. I agree that it is preferable to solve this "properly", but cap styles aren't going to help here. IMHO, gEDA/gaf should be trying to be as "standard" as possible here and allow the user to specify a PostScript join style. This would mean adding an additional field to box and path objects. Adding fields to the file format has been done before, it should be considered carefully but can be done. > How difficult is that to implement and would such a patch be accepted ? Implementing this would be a bit finicky but possible. The problem here is not to produce a working patch but to consider all the implications in the different places that would be affected. Since this makes reviewing such a patch almost as bad as writing it in the first place, I don't think submitting a patch will help. However, since this is a much smaller task than many others on my to-do list, I think chances are good that I will be able to fix this "soon". As an immediate solutiuon to your problem, I suggest moving the arrow object up a bit. If you set a non-zero line width, the bottom tip of the arrow is well-defined, so if you wanted to, you could even calculate the perfect offset by which to move the arrow up.