kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Lorenzo Marcantonio <l.marcantonio@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 09:53:40AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:

> After more thought, and a long walk, I like it even more.  I guess you are talking putting
> full featured board actions or procedural handlers in the tool also?  This opens up the
> architecture quite a bit to extensions and is an outstanding idea Tom.

I only have one thing to say: please take care to not mix the model and
the view/controller... sanity check: could the same operation be done
from the scripting interface without calling the tool UI stuff? if not,
some refactoring could be useful.

> I still think the frame is the best place for that data, if it cross-tool, else of course
> in the tool.  For the data in the frame, maybe try and put the accessors in the base class
> tool.  And declare that class a friend of the frame.   This at least keeps the interface
> to the data clean, the tools really don't have to know where such frame resident data is.

100% agree on that. 'General' display/control stuff IMHO should reside
in the frame, unless it's some board-related preference: what is where
is debatable and subject to a design decision; example: the aux origin
is undeniably on the board, but should, say, the grid be tied to the
board or to the view?

I think that these doubt should be cleared thinking on 'what about if we
could have two views on the same board' (which, incidentally, could be
a good feature in the far future)

-- 
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl