X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:55:15 -0700 From: Andrew Poelstra To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Working with a 0.1mm grid Message-ID: <20111021025514.GF20384@malakian.lan> References: <201110201548 DOT p9KFma9K019672 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20111020172714 DOT GB20384 AT malakian DOT lan> <20111021013756 DOT GE20384 AT malakian DOT lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) 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 Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 01:41:18PM +1100, Stephen Ecob wrote: > >> For example, a value of 1.27mm could be output as 5000 cmils but a > >> value of 0.1mm would be output as 0.1mm (or 100um, etc) > > > > That would be nasty. The suffix code should be consistent. > > > > I'm pretty sure we could use the "mil" and "mm" suffixes and not ever > > lose precision, even when loading from old versions of pcb. > > I think that reading in using "mil" and "mm" suffixes without loss of > precision isn't the problem. > > I think that the problem is that PCB throws away precision of metric > values when saving. > Yes. The question is, how precisely can we save, without producing files that old versions of pcb can't read? -- Andrew Poelstra Email: asp11 at sfu.ca OR apoelstra at wpsoftware.net Web: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew