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=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=X2HtVFiorCEyAeGP6zAgYZt9IrhQamqKh3MVd1kInYg=; b=zg5GpMgQ70MuPBAhbRVDKn6SjnTbomD2RR6sPXT4AWUp5P6sd241stuU25jn139YQo n0XzPJOEyYvyrGdnBkjtdh5XIxBuVHnWUUS4IbSyAZurmGHsLC27Xbzej6Lq7qz4xjKx 9kuZMy1/JPiuUi4p4TM0w2cjpnJy3E77vBR3EsB+wK32ZlS7Bi/8/ZxQRL9c+vSxeZZd i8lsdFy7ut8+oxLpDE3qXux3DG75KQPhUUDvmEh1DJhSIJNQvtWql4doNEcAXf9iDmlT A/4IOLHoz9xCN1igPSoamQbzO/+U5tC3+C2dBSEkhX/vBZDVkOQYE8itk1JaV6wt3h+Q H9Tg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=X2HtVFiorCEyAeGP6zAgYZt9IrhQamqKh3MVd1kInYg=; b=XqewEXv5EdWHDfDCYghqy4MbWUvvhjnq/X/z/sCFtkOH1FqiVK3ZSf5Yc9QxUdFmPX TENZXHkVt/mLK90FPQK4+20JXQ3tmBd0ze2kpwTsLuFvD7FAob1yd0fA0NR0N4WRtKcG 6okD3n6z/hx726OPOmPz4c2Wv8KFP0UDz45HhLXpxbEW7Lv6WXAxwu5SXS2y3V88Nsm5 luC5b47F2eX+L6RJIJWJ5pDTtHTknX4Z47/PRNNYyt0YJHnC4E8nQWe1Y67pq6imDA8t faUFfXuseXmkY17Y9KEfPhQMbFiJb5B5qfbg6aNtFvlI10g553LKgMk/F7/pRKkz24CY VcRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTnqYGyOhbmSPWQSHgIBS1bO+FsfeoJu2nUGig+Hn1h4MyB1QzkSd3AtMVMaY5/qg== X-Received: by 10.25.165.133 with SMTP id o127mr2489323lfe.105.1455349134373; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:38:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:38:49 +0100 From: "Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] [PATCH] Elements Window Message-Id: <20160213083849.f703efce1dcc200b6927c3f6@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1455231503 DOT 28583 DOT 17 DOT camel AT robspanton DOT com> <1455234590 DOT 2726 DOT 11 DOT camel AT robspanton DOT com> <20160212225307 DOT e25f32f46e1a39015ec4d7cd AT gmail DOT com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 > >> When I'm editing a PCB, I often find that I want to find a group of > >> components on it. For example, I want to find a certain set of > >> decoupling capacitors to make sure they're positioned appropriately. > >> This is quite a slow process in pcb at the moment, as one has to use the > >> "Select by name" menu a lot etc. > > > > Seems like a really good search and select window. > > > > There is another selection problem. It is quite common a circuit have be moved a little bit or reused for example a power supply. I had an idea to add a sub layout switch so that all objects added while working would belong to the selected sub laout. Then they could be select --> copied, moved or reused. > > Something along these lines does seem like the most realistic way to > get more graceful hierarchical layout. Rather than changing the type > hierarchy just add a list-of-objects type thing that groups existing > stuff. A copy of the layer structure is needed as well because lines > etc. don't know where they are intrinsically (or else you have to > mangle the objects themselves). The IDs would have to be made > permanent (ie saved, rather than reassigned each session). And of > course actually doing useful things with the sets. > > I wouldn't make a switch that makes other additions automatically add > to sets though. Just tell users to select what they want to include. > There are already a number of global options that influence the > per-object flag settings of subsequently created objects, and though > it's not at all obvious how to do some of the things they do > otherwise, they make for confusing and buggy behavior. Explicitly > selecting the set is a very small amount of additional work compared > to doing the module design and layout. > > Britton I could see three options: 1. Put the objects in a hirerachy. 2. A list of objects for each sub layout. 3. Add an attribute to tell which sub layout they belong. I would guess (2.) or (3.) are most realistic. Nicklas Karlsson