← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: Component fields use case


On 1 September 2011 14:58, Fred Cooke <fred.cooke@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You can't improve anything without making changes, Dick.

An oxymoron there considering you're trying to argue the below:

> And his point re
> breaking the API that exists (he's not the only one who has scripts against
> your text files and prefers kicad for text file storage reasons) is valid.

API !? Since when is a file format an API? It isn't.

Also, it is a myth formed in this thread that Dick changed the file
format anyway. Go and look in the file format specification, the only
thing that changed about the format in Jan 2009 was that the number of
possible fields increased due to the work on the template fields,
which was a very welcome addition to KiCad (Thanks again Dick for
completing that work!).

The OP's script relied on the field number being consistent, but this
couldn't be the case after the template field names improvement. There
was no written guarantee in the file format about this number, and it
would seem minimally intrusive that after 2 years of this improvement
being implemented someone's external script needs a bit of
maintenance. This doesn't seem unreasonable.

Hopefully the developers will see past the moaning and carry on their
excellent work. It is appreciated by some!

$0.02 towards all the developers wages right there...

Best Regards,