[Kicad-developers] Build failed in Jenkins: linux-kicad-full-gcc-head #3970

See Changes: [jean-pierre charras] Fix:Step export not working when special characters (non UTF7) in -- [...truncated 151.57 KB...] [ 87%] creating

[Kicad-developers] Question on PNS router

When we check for collisions we do it first with the worst-case-clearance value (m_maxClearance). I imagine this is so that we can search the RTree uniformly. But don’t we then have to check each collision for actual clearance violation (ie: with the actual, not worst-case clearance values)?

[Kicad-developers] Another diff-pair question

What’s the purpose of the: gwsTarget.FilterByOrientation( DIRECTION_45::ANG_STRAIGHT | DIRECTION_45::ANG_HALF_FULL, DIRECTION_45( dirV ) );line in DIFF_PAIR_PLACER::routeHead()?It keeps one from being able to route a diff-pair straight out from pads 42/43 in the attached PCB.(Note that even with

Re: [Kicad-developers] Diff pair clearances

On 9/18/2018 7:20 AM, Jeff Young wrote: > When calculating obstacles we currently use the diff-pair gap as a > clearance between a diff-pair trace and a diff-pair pad. > > I’m pretty sure that’s wrong.  I’m just not sure how wrong. > > I suspect the diff-pair gap shouldn’t be used as a clearance

Re: [Kicad-developers] Diff pair clearances

Hi Wayne, > On 18 Sep 2018, at 23:20, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > > On 9/18/2018 7:20 AM, Jeff Young wrote: >> When calculating obstacles we currently use the diff-pair gap as a >> clearance between a diff-pair trace and a diff-pair pad. >> >> I’m pretty sure that’s wrong. I’m just not sure how

Re: [Kicad-developers] GAL canvas strategy - testers needed!

I pushed John’s 3 patches along with one of my own which fixes the POT rendering. (It is actually an error in the library item, but it’s not alone -- at least optocoupler IL300 has the same issue.) Cheers, Jeff. > On 18 Sep 2018, at 15:10, John Beard wrote: > > Hi, > > The rendering of

Re: [Kicad-developers] Diff pair clearances

Agreed. Diff pairs should have an associated clearance rule to other objects and it has nothing to do with the gap. One place where the gap should be used is in manual tuning of the pair. If I route a pair and end it on a component that necessarily has non-symmetric pad fanout, I might want to

Re: [Kicad-developers] Question on PNS router

On 18/09/18 12:17, Jeff Young wrote: > When we check for collisions we do it first with the > worst-case-clearance value (m_maxClearance).  I imagine this is so that > we can search the RTree uniformly. > Hi Jeff, Yes, that's ^^^ the reason. > But don’t we then have to check each collision for

Re: [Kicad-developers] GAL canvas strategy - testers needed!

Hi John, The line is definitely in the R_POT symbol (at least in the Device symbol library) so it's possible that it is a gal bug. Cheers, Wayne On 9/18/2018 10:10 AM, John Beard wrote: > Hi, > > The rendering of unclosed polyline in symbols is different in GAL. > > See the attached

[Kicad-developers] Diff pair clearances

When calculating obstacles we currently use the diff-pair gap as a clearance between a diff-pair trace and a diff-pair pad. I’m pretty sure that’s wrong. I’m just not sure how wrong. I suspect the diff-pair gap shouldn’t be used as a clearance at all. It’s the gap between the traces, not a

Re: [Kicad-developers] GAL canvas strategy - testers needed!

Hi, Here are a handful of tiny fixes for warnings in the eeschema GAL branch. Nothing really controversial, I think (though the second one fixes quite a verbose tranche of warnings - one for almost every type of object :-). Cheers, John On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:35 AM Jeff Young wrote: > >

[Kicad-developers] Jenkins build is back to normal : linux-kicad-full-gcc-head #3971

See ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe :

Re: [Kicad-developers] GAL canvas strategy - testers needed!

Hi, The rendering of unclosed polyline in symbols is different in GAL. See the attached (standard libs potentiometer symbol) - in the legacy canvas, the arrow doesn't have a missing lower side. Is this a bug in GAL, or is it actually intended and the symbol is wrong (but happened to work before

Re: [Kicad-developers] GAL canvas strategy - testers needed!

I bet this is a difference in behavior in GAL, I had to deal with this a bunch for the GerbView port. GAL vs. legacy handles the last point in a polyline/polygon differently although I'm not at my code and so I can't remember which way the difference goes. On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:08 AM John

Re: [Kicad-developers] Question on PNS router

Got it. Thanks for the pointer. > On 18 Sep 2018, at 13:32, Tomasz Wlostowski wrote: > > On 18/09/18 12:17, Jeff Young wrote: >> When we check for collisions we do it first with the >> worst-case-clearance value (m_maxClearance). I imagine this is so that >> we can search the RTree