kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@...>]

Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>> Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
>> 
>>> Wayne,
>>>
>>> were you going to allow a 1.5 magnification on each step. I thought 
>>> you had set out down that path.
>>> 
>> I have been working on it indirectly. The last few commits I've made
>> were in a vain effort to clean things up a bit before tackling the new
>> zoom implementation. Like many things in Kicad that seem like they
>> should be relatively trivial to implement, there always seems to be some
>> hidden gotchas that jump up to bite you. The current device context
>> (drawing) implementation is very fragile. I am not sure why the
>> capabilities of wxDC were not used for drawing. I have looked at
>> several examples as well as the source code for wxDC and cannot
>> understand why much of what is already implement in wxDC was basically
>> reimplemented by the various drawing, clipping, scaling, etc. functions
>> in Kicad (see gr_basic.cpp). This is one of the reason it's taking
>> longer than I had hoped. If Kicad required some special drawing
>> functionality, why not create a class derived from wxDC? This makes
>> making changes to the drawing code tricky. You have to find every place
>> in the code where zooming is touched and make sure you don't break
>> anything else. I was initially thinking of fixing the drawing code
>> first so that the zoom code would be trivial to implement. I really
>> don't like to do things twice if I can avoid it. However, fixing the
>> drawing code is a major job fraught with lots of potential breakage. I
>> guess I can break my own rule and implement the new the zoom in the
>> short term. Maybe there is some way for me to design it so that will
>> cleanly drop into any updated drawing code.
>> 
>>> I am using eeschema today and cannot get the right zoom. It is 
>>> frustrating, it is either too close or too far out.
>>>
>>> I am going blind, so the too far out is troublesome. Too close does 
>>> not let you see what you want.
>>> 
>> Me too! It's hell getting old!
>> 
>>> When I looked at we were using a 2X factor on zooms. Is this still the 
>>> case?
>>> 
>> You are correct. Each zoom factor is 2X the previous zoom setting. I
>> need to add a scalar to get zoom capability at less than integer
>> intervals to get zoom factor of 1.5. I'll try to implement something as
>> soon as I can.
>>
>> Wayne
>> 
> 
> You da man!
It must be true. This is second time today that I got an email with
that exact same quote. It must be some kind of good karma ;)

Wayne
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
>