kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Dick Hollenbeck <dick@...>]

lomarcan@... wrote:
> OK, it works pretty fine now... there is STILL one bug to fix: since 
> the text routines shrinks or enlarge the requested width (otherwise 
> text will look like crap) you 'lose' the wysiwyg in pcbnew (eeschema is 
> no issue since you don't specify pen width)... and I fear it will apply 
> to the gerber export, too :(
>
> I even found a buglet in eeschema... if 
> you insert a text comment with text # (a single pound, maybe even if it 
> start with a pound), reloading fails (aborts the load a few line 
> after).
>
> The ~ syntax is made pervasive since there is no reason to 
> keep the drawing routines with a parameter (and the ~ is not a useful 
> character anyway). Added a 'bold' flag in the structs in parallel to 
> the italic one. In eeschema is saved using pen width 0 for normal and 
> width 1 for bold, so it should be compatible.
>
> The postscript plotter 
> was optimized too, instead of emitting complete line statements it 
> emits full paths (i.e. before there was a PS path for each segment, now 
> path are delimited); this removes some graphics artifacts (due to line 
> cap/join handling) AND output size (when distilled there can be a 10% 
> reduction in size). And a global variable less to care for :P
>
> I attach 
> a showcase plot and the patch in its current state (i.e. not cleaned up 
> :P). For reference it is against SVN 1783. This is of course strictly 
> for testing (like all svn things :P) but in these days I'm using it for 
> production works without issues... (yes, they PAY me to use and modify 
> kicad - the modify thing in my spare time at work :D)
>
> Ah, the 
> include/grfonte.h of course remain orphan after this...

At first glance this looks like nice work. There were a couple of 
formatting problems in common/drawtxt.cpp

but other than that I think it at least looks clean.

I think Jean-Pierre should be the one to screen this one and decide 
which of it he wants to accept.

--------

When did yahoo groups start handling the attachments nicely like this? 
Did they finally succumb to competitive pressure from google groups? Or 
do you have to post from the web page or what?


Dick