Le 15/06/2016 à 02:33, Simon Richter a écrit : > Hi, > > for net ties, I have to touch the schematic cleanup, because that will > merge adjacent wires going in the same direction, which is not useful > for me, as I need all wires going into a tie as separate nets (except > for ERC, where they are connected).
I do not understand why net ties are related to schematic cleanup. They are 2 separate features. Although no decision was taken, inside a schematic, the best way for a net tie is a virtual component with 2 (or more) pins connected to each net and a specific footprint put on the board (to control the location of nets connection, the connected layers ... This is also the way used in other ECAD tools. > > I'd like to generalize this to "wires are split at junctions and net > ties." This has an immediate effect of making the Delete key behave the > same as the Backspace key -- delete a wire segment up to the next junction. > > This means that the implementation for the Backspace key can be greatly > simplified, as we don't have to look out for junctions anymore -- we > just delete the selected segment and are done. > > The Delete key can be given a more useful function: delete across > corners, but not across junctions. That is a change compared with the > current implementation, where it would delete a straight wire across > junctions, but not around a corner. IMO, having a way to delete an > entire connection quickly is more useful, especially as a one-key undo > after drawing multiple segments. > > The other questions turning up there are related to the way > SchematicCleanup works internally. > > Right now, it consists of two loops over all schematic elements, with > the inner loop starting after the current outer element, so for tuples > (x,y), y > x in almost all cases. Almost, because when an element is > deleted, the inner loop is restarted from the beginning of the list in > case the current element was also the one that is now gone. > > This is slightly fragile because there is no test that stops a line from > being merged with itself and subsequently deleted as redundant, but that > can happen only if the same line was merged already -- so you need three > redundant lines to trigger that bug. > > Other than that, it works well because the only cases handled there are > wire-wire and junction-junction tuples. However, I need to introduce > wire-junction tests, so the symmetry is gone. I can see a few ways how > to proceed here: > > 1. Always traverse the entire matrix and start skipping symmetric tests > after passing the diagonal. This will double the number of iterations, > but all symmetric tests are skipped in half of them, so the actual > runtime increase is not that drastic. > > 2. Create helper functions with fixed types, and use the appropriate > parameter order. This is probably the least invasive. > > 3. Order the draw list by element type. This would allow us to shave off > a few more cycles in the O(N^2) cleanup function, but make insertion > more expensive (although with caching, we can still keep it O(1)). This > would also make schematic files a bit more easier to compare in version > control. > > 4. Order the draw list by element type and coordinates. This makes > insertion quite a bit heavier, but saves quite a lot during the cleanup > as we can terminate the inner loop if the hit boxes for the remaining > elements can no longer overlap, and it would be really great for > comparing files in version control as we'd have full normalization. > > Questions? Comments? > > Simon > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- Jean-Pierre CHARRAS _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
