On 7/26/2016 9:29 AM, Nick Østergaard wrote: > 2016-07-26 14:58 GMT+02:00 Wayne Stambaugh <[email protected]>: >> On 7/26/2016 7:20 AM, Nick Østergaard wrote: >>> Welcome. >>> >>> I have found a pcb file on my computer, I am not sure of its origin, >>> that has a buggy rendering both in legacy and GAL in different, but >>> similar ways. Maybe you should include this in your testing and >>> development. >>> >>> About unittests, there is already some stuff in the qa folder using >>> python... but this is mostly a proof of concept. Nothing is really >>> tested at the moment, except for file loading more or less. I would >>> personally like to see some more testing, although I am not sure that >>> the boost test module is the best for this either. >> >> I suggested using the boost unit testing framework to Alejandro. The >> problem with using python unit testing is that not everything in Pcbnew >> is swigged so you wouldn't be able to test that code unless there is >> someway to compile and run C++ test code from the python unit test >> framework. If this can be done, then boost unit test wouldn't be necessary. >> >> While I'm not 100% convinced that the boost unit test frameworks is the >> way to go, it seems to compare well to the other C++ test frameworks. >> The benefit is it does not add yet another dependency and allows us to >> use C++ code to write tests. I do not have any experience in this area >> so if someone as experience using the different c++ unit test >> frameworks, feel free to comment. >> >>> >>> Will your work eventually lead to use for example arcs on copper >>> layers, which is not supported by the DRC? >> >> It should allow for this but AFAIK we still cannot generate gerbers with >> arcs. > > Why not?
Don't know. Maybe because we don't have DRC support for arcs yet. All arcs and circles (except pads) on copper layers are generated as a series of line segments rather than arcs. Someone please correct me if I am wrong about this. > > The gerber spec has: 4.5 Circular Interpolation (G02/G03) and (G74/G75) > > I might be misinterpreting the spec, but I see that as it supports > _circular_ arcs. Which is what we have in KiCad. > >> >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> 2016-07-15 12:25 GMT+02:00 Alejandro Garcia Montoro >>> <[email protected]>: >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> I've been working on some geometry code on this branch: >>>> https://code.launchpad.net/~alejandro-garciamontoro/kicad/kicad-polygon-refactor >>>> >>>> This is still an ongoing work. You can consider this as a new developer >>>> getting used to the code, waiting for Wayne and Javier to review the code >>>> and decide if I finally join the team :) By the way, for the guys that were >>>> not at the CERN hackaton: I am Alejandro García, a Computer Science and >>>> Mathematics student from Granada, Spain; the idea is to work on KiCAD >>>> full-time once I finish my studies; that is, since September 19th. >>>> >>>> So far, the following has been done: >>>> >>>> CPolyLine refactoring, thouroughly tested in the tests directory. >>>> >>>> CPolyLine::Chamfer method has been refactored into >>>> SHAPE_POLY_SET::ChamferPolygon method. The main behaviour of the old method >>>> has been maintained, returning a completely new POLYGON object; if you >>>> think >>>> it should modify the original polygon instead of returning a copy of a new >>>> one, let me know. This was done this way just to preserve the way CPolyLine >>>> did its job. Furthermore, a sanity check was introduced into the old >>>> CPolyLine method: due to rounding errors, two corners with the exact same >>>> coordinates could be added, and the CPolyLine::RemoveNullSegments was not >>>> able to remove them (this is a bug that should be studied if we continue to >>>> use CPolyLine code; as this is not the idea, I just fixed the errors in the >>>> new ChamferPolygon method to be able to test my refactoring). >>>> CPolyLine::Fillet method has been refactored into >>>> SHAPE_POLY_SET::FilletPolygon method. The same previous comments apply >>>> here. >>>> The AppendBezier methods have not been moved to SHAPE_POLY_SET yes. As I >>>> think Michele is working on a SHAPE_ARC class, I though it's better to wait >>>> for that code to be ready. >>>> >>>> The collision between a SHAPE_POLY_SET object and a point has been >>>> implemented and tested: the main behaviour is managed from the Contains >>>> method, that has been fixed to support holes, and that is implemented with >>>> the new containsSingle private method. >>>> Some more simple methods have been implemented in the SHAPE_POLY_SET class: >>>> HasHoles method, which was declared but not defined and PointOnEdge, which >>>> is basically a loop over the SHAPE_LINE_CHAIN::PointOnEdge method. >>>> A tests folder has been added to the project directory structure (the main >>>> CMakeFile.txt was also modified in order to handle this new directory). As >>>> a new developer in the project I missed there were some kind of standard >>>> test suite in KiCAD to be used; hopefully, Michele showed to me at CERN how >>>> he was doing his tests (thank you!), so this is based on his files. I think >>>> we should make sure that in the not so distant future we add some standard >>>> test suite to the project; maybe not this one, as I think you wanna get rid >>>> of Boost library and these tests are based on Boost Test; anyway, I think >>>> this could be a good idea for the project. >>>> The tests folder I added contains the following new files: >>>> >>>> CMakeLists.txt: it creates a new MyTests executable inside the tests >>>> directory. >>>> module.cpp: Defines the Boost test module. >>>> fixtures.h: Defines common data for the tests to check the methods. >>>> chamfer_fillet_test.cpp: Defines unity tests to check the CPolyLine -> >>>> SHAPE_POLY_SET refactor did not change the previous behaviour. >>>> collision_test.cpp: Defines unity tests to check the implementation of the >>>> methods HasHoles, PointOnEdge, Contains and Collide works well. >>>> >>>> Wayne, please, review these code changes and let me know if there is >>>> anything wrong or something I can improve for the future work :) >>>> >>>> Looking forward to hear from you, guys! >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Alejandro >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >>>> Post to : [email protected] >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >>>> Post to : [email protected] >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> Post to : [email protected] >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
