On 8/3/2016 2:34 AM, Sergey A. Borshch wrote: > On 03.08.2016 05:12, Werner Almesberger wrote: >> Chris Pavlina wrote: >>> Very good point about the start/end points. eeschema doesn't currently >>> support that - it can't fill enclosed regions that are enclosed by >>> multiple graphical objects - but this would ensure it could in the >>> future with minimal changes. Okay - I'm for using start/end instead of >>> angles, then. I'd still like to get rid of the redundant info, though. >> >> You can't entirely win this :-) >> >> If you use center, start, and end point, one could still diverge. >> >> In fped, I solved this as follows: I have center, start point >> (defining radius and angle), and end point (defining angle). >> No matter where the end point is, its distance from the center is >> (and has to be) ignored. > > How about two variants to define arcs: > 1) Center point, start angle, end angle > 2) start point, end point, radius. > Both of them completely describe arcs, both of them has no diverge, both > of them are usable in particular situation. > This is what Chris was trying to clean up. We current save both 1 & 2 for every arc. Sounds like that wont be changing?
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
