Anthony Blake wrote: > John Griessen wrote: > >> Seems like the force-field approach >> >>> just tweaks his "better" definition based on user input and not just the >>> board geometrics. >>> >> Right. To move in one direction from a point that repels is one way to code >> such a function. >> Another would be a straight line, and even better, a hand drawn line-segment >> line >> carving out regions of circuitry that should stay some distance away from >> eachother. >> Then rerun the program with wider DRC rules for the next region to pack >> against the first. and so on. >> > > I would prefer to implement this sort of functionality with topological > directives or constraints, and avoid geometric constraints if possible. >
Kind of like providing the circuit-board equivalent of a geological topographical/relief map, so the algorithms know where the "valleys" (preferred paths) and "peaks" (mountains, don't climb them unless necessary) are? And the lakes, airports, Area 51's, etc.... Except that with circuit boards it would be more than 3-D, because some of the mountains would be abstract things like excessive trace length (which might later trigger the addition of a via and then a retry), DRC rules, desire to avoid the extreme edges of the board, and so on... An [n]-D "relief map"... Ok, that's about all that I can contribute to the idea. Love the work, and obviously totally unqualified to do any of it. :) b.g. -- Bill Gatliff [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
