On poniedziałek, 31 marca 2008, John Griessen wrote: > Bartlomiej Wolowiec wrote: > > On niedziela, 30 marca 2008, John Griessen wrote: > >> And you could make a "broom" or "dusting-brush" from a line of point > >> force tools. > >> > >> Now how to code all these physics models? Hmmm...?? > >> > >> John Griessen > > > > It sounds good:) > > I think that a good idea in creating this tool may be recalling the > > intuitioncoming from physics models, but I will try to avoid implementing > > it straight as a phisics model, > > Sure, use approximations and/or focus only on a near zone, but give > yourself a clear description of your coding goal to work from, or get lost > in the lines and lines of code....
Yes, I know that before coding it's good to have detailed plan (Due to moving GSoC application deadline I will have more time to think of it :) ) > We don't have polar coordinates in our code, so one approximation > would be to make some of the forces simple to calculate, but be sure to > accurately measure distances, or it won't stay DRC clean... I know that DRC is one of the most important things which I should take into consideration... I mean, that if the algorithm doesn't find move fulfilling DRC, it will be better when it doesn't do anything. After quite long time of thinking on this subject I made up my mind that maybe physics methods are quite good, mainly because they determine simple goals. Unfortunately, I have no good idea for efficient implementation of this. I mean, that in my mind there are mostly approximate computations, which after disturbing give satisfactory (stable) result through repeated iterations. However,I don't know if it's a good idea... -- Bartlomiej Wolowiec _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
