| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
Tim Hanson a écrit :
Yes, a branch seems like very reasonable, if your changes 50 % files in eeschema, and involve changes in other tools. About XXX_SCREEN classes, i believe it is better to have only one class (BASE_SCREEN), not virtual. in pcbnew , the PCB_SCREEN handles data which must be, in fact in a BOARD structure, and pcbnew should use only the BASE_SCREEN class. SCH_SCREEN could be a specific class (something like class SchematicContainer, which uses if needed the BASE_SCREEN class)Hi Dick, Yes, I have been worried about the fact that this may piss a number of people off. The changes are very significant -- I've modified at least half of the files in eeschema/. A branch seems like a very reasonable way to handle this design change, and integrate changes as I get feedback. I will investigate it, but, of course, I hope that it will ultimately be used in the distribution, especially given all the work I've put into it! I'll just keep modifying my branch until there is overbearing reason to use it (like import gEDA files..)
in fact XXX_SCREEN classes are very badly designed (i apologize), and main classes used to handle data might be a SchematicContainer in eeschema,
and a BOARD class in pcbnew (and perhaps gerbview also)BASE_SCREEN could be usefull to only handle graphic info and functions (zoom, cursor position ..) common to eeschema and pcbnew.
If ok I'll see how to remove PCB_SCREEN from pcbnew, cvpcb and gerbview (and therefore use only the BASE_SCREEN class).
-- Jean-Pierre CHARRAS Maître de conférences Directeur d'études 2ieme année. Génie Electrique et Informatique Industrielle 2 Institut Universitaire de Technologie 1 de Grenoble BP 67, 38402 St Martin d'Heres Cedex Recherche : Grenoble Image Parole Signal Automatique (GIPSA - INPG) 46, Avenue Félix Viallet 38031 Grenoble Cedex
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
