Now that it’s a tree we could do the 3 level hierarchy pretty easily. In fact,
I started to, but I found it really annoying with my small boards where I
usually only have a handful of errors. That’s when I had the filter checkbox
idea.
I also thought about collapsing the 3 tabs. But they really are different: an
unconnected isn’t a violation (there’s no rule that it violates). Similarly,
the Footprint Warnings are more like C++’s “did you mean ==” warning when you
use a single “=” in an odd place: they as likely to be wrong as right.
I do like the right-click clear and ignore actions. And I think those are fine
to do at the 64-types granularity. But I don’t really want to do that just to
not show courtyard violations.
> On 25 Feb 2020, at 20:53, Jon Evans <j...@craftyjon.com> wrote:
>
> Some mockup to give context to my earlier reply:
> You could right-click a given violation, and clear (one-time) or ignore
> (persistent) either that particular violation, or all violations of its class.
> You could also right-click the class header ("Clearance Violations") and
> clear all / ignore all.
> <image.png>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:21 PM Jon Evans <j...@craftyjon.com
> <mailto:j...@craftyjon.com>> wrote:
> The idea I was kicking around was to build a 2-level tree, with the parents
> being these categories (in new drc branch):
> https://gitlab.com/kicad/code/kicad/-/blob/drc/pcbnew/drc/drc_violation.h#L31
> <https://gitlab.com/kicad/code/kicad/-/blob/drc/pcbnew/drc/drc_violation.h#L31>
> I think there are much fewer than 64 error types that actually need to be
> displayed to the user in groups. I'm not sure the enum there has absolutely
> everything, but I do think it's close.
>
> I was planning on getting rid of the 3 tabs -- I don't think it makes sense
> to have the three tabs and also filters in the "violations" tab -- the other
> two tabs are just different types of violations.
>
> I am also not sure how much it makes sense to have checkboxes for
> showing/hiding violations.
> It seems like a better ultimate state would be:
> (a) being able to turn on/off all types of violations (and set their severity)
> (b) being able to clear or ignore certain violations or certain classes of
> violations in one go (I was thinking via a context menu on each violation and
> the tree header per violation class)
>
> -Jon
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 2:34 PM Jeff Young <j...@rokeby.ie
> <mailto:j...@rokeby.ie>> wrote:
> I’m looking at adding filtering to the DRC window. I’d like to use something
> similar to the HTML report panel where we’d have some checkboxes under the
> listbox:
>
> [ ] Show All [ ] Clearances [ ] Constraints [ ] Courtyards
>
> It would be nice and consistent to then have a Save button after that. But
> this would be a slight procedural change:
> 1) it would separate the reports by the 3 tabs: Violations, Unconnected,
> Footprint Warnings
> 2) you couldn’t set it and forget it: you’d have to click the Save button
> each time you wanted a report
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Note: yes, I did consider user-defined filtering. But we currently have 64
> DRC error types, and I’m not sure users really want to wade through that list
> (nor do we want to have to reply to queries of the form “what does DRC error
> type XYZ include?”
>
> Note 2: regardless of that, feel free to comment on anything (including “we
> really must have user-defined filtering”).
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> <mailto:kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
_______________________________________________
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
