X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
From:	Kevin Redon <ml AT mail DOT tsaitgaist DOT info>
To:	geda-user <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] square clearance
In-reply-to:	<201309181724.r8IHOwHP007496@envy.delorie.com>
References:	<1379435002-sup-1363 AT dennou> <201309171649 DOT r8HGn174009713 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <1379488984-sup-7784 AT dennou> <201309181724 DOT r8IHOwHP007496 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:38:39 +0200
Message-Id:	<1379575901-sup-9482@dennou>
User-Agent:	Sup/0.14.1
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id r8J7d6ut007831
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

Excerpts from DJ Delorie's message of 2013-09-18 19:24:58 +0200:
> 
> > Aren't square clearances manufacturable?
> 
> http://www.delorie.com/pcb/notches.html
> 
> In general, sharp corners, inside or outside, are less preferred than
> rounded transitions, manufacturability-wise.

that makes total sense.

the proper solution might be to allow polygons and holes (or add elementpolygon), but that seems to be quite a hard task
http://archives.seul.org/geda/user/Feb-2007/msg00061.html

- Raw text -