X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
From: Kai-Martin Knaak <kmk AT familieknaak DOT de>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] The nature of gEDA layers
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 09:44:56 +0100
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <n8pqa8$5fb$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601180756390 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv> <s6n1t93h4ub DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux> <20160127091746 DOT 1c7a976c2752f913921688ac AT gmail DOT com> <s6npowne74w DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux> <20160127141334 DOT c738feb9dbeb54a7dec3dff8 AT gmail DOT com> <s6n37tjt1tv DOT fsf AT falbala DOT ieap DOT uni-kiel DOT de> <56A8F74B DOT 8080304 AT ecosensory DOT com> <CAC4O8c9UKLsh5FAAwUMEtHThKH-w3gUmCU2i9dRW9igkyRt-TQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAJZxidDmjMtd_fKvR5qZVRa+hwDUbvfaz79oZjkBgDuE1m8RBg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <56A961BC DOT 3040405 AT ecosensory DOT com> <CAJZxidC=nbxAinOtpfGHHqwPXbEMrhfat7jKgA9KBp3EVVg4_Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <s6nbn863xlu DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux> <56A9E416 DOT 8080500 AT ecosensory DOT com> <20160128124020 DOT 8f2f33210481f637a696f5d0 AT gmail DOT com> <CAJZxidD7=NE+Q3FGOU+ER3Xh7TRskEPRTKa=yrwUm51_VaYw0A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20160128164922 DOT 7bd920859ab8462f8abb0f40 AT gmail DOT com> <s6ny4b9r3x7 DOT fsf AT falbala DOT ieap DOT uni-kiel DOT de> <20160128191943 DOT d3f06f258e112a8d7d532327 AT gmail DOT com> <s6nio2d2yr0 DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux> <20160201113121 DOT 9e1229dc74b565f082c3bfba AT gmail DOT com> <s6n60y8urvs DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet AT ger DOT gmane DOT org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: a89-182-30-53.net-htp.de
User-Agent: KNode/4.14.10
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Stephan Böttcher wrote:

>> I did not get what "depth=200" is for.
> 
> Currently, the PCB objects come with a lot of implicit aura
> attached, polygon clearance, soldermask clearance, solderpad,
> thermals, ...
> 
> A generic geometry may need to be more explicit.
> 
> Everything is drawn at a depth.  There are positive and negative
> depths. Deeper stuff is drawn before shallower stuff.  Negative
> depth draw holes and clerances.
> 
I feel like this is the kind of magic that looks elegant and generic 
on inception but tends to turn into an obstacle further down the 
evolution of the application. Specifically:

* In addition to positive and negative, there may arise the need for a 
third mode of drawing. E.g. XOR-drawing. (No, I don't know what XOR-
draw would be good for in the context of EDA -- just brain storming)

* The depth parameter kind of enforces the way how to render the 
design. It would be more flexible and potentially easier to extend to 
mark-up the intended meaning.

---<)kaimartin(>---