jean-pierre.charras@... wrote:
Dick Hollenbeck a écrit :
I meant to say specctra syntax, not specctra format. There is no
specctra format that can fully describe a board. Briefly, there is the
DSN format and the SES format. The DSN describes the copper layers
only, no technical layers. No text. The SES format describes a subset
of the copper layers and has less information in it.
I did not understood that.
So, I do not see any problem to use the Specctra syntax.
One or more sample board files should be created then before any coding
is done IMO, using a text editor and a brain.
I think this process is easiest to create the sample(s):
1) load a DSN file from the specctra_export into a text editor or have
it as a hardcopy printout nearby for reference.
2) load an existing board file, one with multiple layers, components,
tracks, vias, drawings, and multiple zones.
3) copy the board file to a new window, and convert it to the new
syntax, but incorporate some new concepts. This is an object
conversion, not so much a line by line conversion.
New concepts in the file:
** Special layer names. Any technical layers, plus front and back
copper, should get fixed names rather than layer numbers
** Layer sets as discussed.
** unit_res see this in the specctra spec, it allows different regions
in the file to to have different units. each unit_res has a limited
scope of applicability.
** use concise element names, pay attention to frequency of use. no
element should have a lot of unnamed parameters, but instead use nested
elements to make the file self documenting.
** the first copper layer is number 0 but has a special name 'front', in
addition to any name the user gives it.Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
jean-pierre.charras@... wrote:
Dick Hollenbeck a écrit :
I meant to say specctra syntax, not specctra format. There is no
specctra format that can fully describe a board. Briefly, there is the
DSN format and the SES format. The DSN describes the copper layers
only, no technical layers. No text. The SES format describes a subset
of the copper layers and has less information in it.
I did not understood that.
So, I do not see any problem to use the Specctra syntax.
One or more sample board files should be created then before any coding
is done IMO, using a text editor and a brain.
I think this process is easiest to create the sample(s):
1) load a DSN file from the specctra_export into a text editor or have
it as a hardcopy printout nearby for reference.
2) load an existing board file, one with multiple layers, components,
tracks, vias, drawings, and multiple zones.
3) copy the board file to a new window, and convert it to the new
syntax, but incorporate some new concepts. This is an object
conversion, not so much a line by line conversion.
New concepts in the file:
