On 11/14/2012 12:10 AM, Chris Giorgi wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Dick Hollenbeck <d...@softplc.com > <mailto:d...@softplc.com>> wrote: > > On 11/13/2012 05:33 PM, Chris Giorgi wrote: > > Good afternoon, > > > > I've been glancing at this thread on&off for a while and have and have > an observation > > and suggestion. > > > > A board has a distinct set of lamination layers: > > Front > > Inner 1 > > : > > Inner n > > Back > > > > Each lamination may have one or more physical materials or operations: > > Substrate, Copper, Adhesive, Solder Paste, Solder Mask, Silk > Screen, Drill, Place > > Parts, Probe, etc... > > A real board does, yes. But in the software each of the above is a > "layer", so the > paradigm you are proposing does not match, nor does it help in the > reduction of dope > associated with pads, measured in total text length. > > In this thread, mostly we are trimming pad descriptions down with this, > since we do not > have padstack support. This *.kicad_pcb and *.kicad_mod effort now is > merely a file > format conversion, to improved readability. There is no change being > made at this > time to > internal BOARD data structures as a result of this current work. > > > Dick, > I was suggesting only a consistent naming scheme for the (logical) layers > based on the > physical layering and materials. Internal representations would not need to > change at > all, and the resultant names are similar, if not identical to those suggested > by Wayne > in most cases. For conciseness and clarity, I would suggest types labeled > "Cu", "Adh", > "Paste", "Silk", "Mask", "Draw", "Cmnt", and "Edge". Symbolic layer positions > include > "F" or "Front" for the first defined (0), "B" or "Back" for the last defined > (N), "I" or > "Inner" followed by a number for 1 - (N-1), and "G" or "Global" for items not > residing > on a specific physical layer. > > "Front" -> "0.Cu" = "F.Cu" = "Front.Cu" > "Inner1" -> "1.Cu" = "I1.Cu" = "Inner1.Cu" > "Inner{n}" -> "{n}.Cu" = "I{n}.Cu" = "Inner{n}.Cu" > "Inner14" -> "14.Cu" = "I14.Cu" = "Inner14.Cu" > "Back" -> "15.Cu" = "B.Cu" = "Back.Cu" > "Adhes_Back" -> "B.Adh" > "Adhes_Front" -> "F.Adh" > "SoldP_Back" -> "B.Paste" > "SoldP_Front" -> "F.Paste" > "SilkS_Back" -> "B.Silk" > "SilkS_Front" -> "F.Silk" > "Mask_Back" -> "B.Mask" > "Mask_Front" -> "F.Mask" > "Drawings" -> "G.Draw" > "Comments" -> "G.Cmnt" > "Eco1" -> "G.Eco1" > "Eco2" -> "G.Eco2" > "PCB_Edges" "G.Edge" > > Parsing would be very straightforward and the format I proposed would allow > for very > concise representations of more complex pad structures, such as a thermal via > connected > to the front, back, and 2nd and 4th inner copper ground layers in an 8 layer > board -- > eg. 0+I2+Inner4+Back.Cu . > > Parsing (wild stab): > - Split at "." as L, T ( L="0+I2+Inner4+Back", T="Cu") > - Handle wildcards in L, T. ("*" -> Array containing all defined values, > skip tokenizer) > - Tokenize L by replacing symbolic names with numeric identifiers ( > L'="0+2+4+7" ) > (First letter and number is unique) > - If we have ranges, replace with included values (i.e. "0-2+4" -> > "0+1+2+4"). > - Dump into an array L'' = [0,1,2,4] > - Treat T similarly (T' = "Cu") (i.e. "Eco1-3" -> "Eco1+Eco2+Eco3", > "Mask1+2+Paste" -> > "Mask1+Mask2+Paste"). > - Lookup indices for T and dump into an array T'' = [5] > - Iterate L'' and T'', marking each layer as a bit in a field, or however > it's > represented internally. > (pseudocode: for (l in L'') { for (t in T'') { layers.setbit(layer[l][t]]) } ) > > In my opinion, the results would be concise, while remaining readable and > possibly > allowing for forward compatibility. Looking back at the above, I wonder if it > might make > more sense to reverse the order -- {Type}({Idx.})(.{LayerPosition}) -- giving > us "Cu.F", > "Adh.B", "Silk.Front", "Cu.3", "Eco1", "Cu.In2", and "Draw", which I find > slightly more > readable.
I finished my implementation last night. Really, the main win was simply *.Cu in through hole pads. The rest is just noise mostly, and what is not in the noise category is in the arm waving category. Submit a patch if you want it considered. I am back onto the layer manager now. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp