kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/14/2016 3:06 PM, Bernhard Stegmaier wrote:
> Question for me is what happens to eeschema?
> For pcbnew it is maybe just adding some missing things and polishing some other, but eeschema currently has nothing in that direction.
> Anybody already working on that?

Implementing GAL and the new tool framework in Eeschema is coming as
part of the current dev cycle.  It wont start until after I finish up
with the Eeschema refactor.  Trust me when I tell you, to do so would
not be a good idea.

> 
> 
> Regards,
> Bernhard
> 
>> On 14.01.2016, at 20:54, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Are we even still going to have legacy pcbnew at the next release? 
>> What's the schedule for fully deprecating it?

It will not be deprecated until we have one for one feature parity
between the canvases and we can get by without it on all supported
platforms.  AFAIK, Tom is working on a wxDC gal implementation which
should eliminate the second part.  If this happens before the next
release, then there is no reason to continue to support the legacy canvas.

>>
>> On other platforms it's highly variable, I've seen it silly slow on some 
>> and nearly real-time on others.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 08:52:21PM +0100, Bernhard Stegmaier wrote:
>>> Depending on how drawing is implemented on other platforms this could cause a major performance impact.
>>> The slowness on OS X was due to the fact that the dots are not just pixels, but really rendered and antialiased content (what obviously has much more impact on a HiDPI Retina display).
>>>
>>> Before my change the naive drawing (each line/circle in a single “call”) was really bad.
>>> Just a warning, but maybe this is not such a big deal on Linux/Windows...
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Bernhard
>>>
>>>> On 14.01.2016, at 20:40, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, I just mean using the same style in both, either way. I don't really 
>>>> care which, though I have a slight preference for dots myself.
>>>>
>>>> Minor side note: I do almost wish the dots would become something like 
>>>> little crosses when you zoom in. They're nice when zoomed out, but when 
>>>> they are spaced very sparsely, they become almost invisible. 
>>>> Alternatively, maybe the intensity of the color could be dialed back a 
>>>> bit when zoomed out, to reflect the increased average intensity over the 
>>>> displayed area?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 02:37:13PM -0500, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>>>>> On 1/14/2016 1:58 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah, I'll be difficult too - it looks Bad now, very distracting. The 
>>>>>> legacy grid color was meant for use with a dot grid, not a line grid, so 
>>>>>> it has to be brighter. When you use it for a line grid, it's really 
>>>>>> garish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that the grid color ought to be customizable like the layer 
>>>>>> colors - and unless we want to make separate legacy and GAL grid color 
>>>>>> options (which I really do not recommend), perhaps we should unify the 
>>>>>> grid types?
>>>>>
>>>>> If by unify you mean use lines in the legacy canvas in place of dots,
>>>>> I'm not at all thrilled about that.  The line grid is too distracting
>>>>> for normal use even when you dial back the color (since Tom's patch).  I
>>>>> would prefer we figure out away to use dots (or some facsimile there of)
>>>>> on the gal canvas.  I would be willing to guess that I'm not alone in
>>>>> that preference.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Bernhard Stegmaier wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know, I am difficult… :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In GAL canvas grid was almost invisible up to now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With one of the last commit it obviously respects grid color which it didn’t before… yes, it is very visible now:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it intended to stay this way?
>>>>>>> OK, I can see the grid very well now, but I hardly can see the ratsnest lines now… :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have seen in the code that a “dot” grid (using small rectangles) seems to be implemented… any special reasons why this is not used?
>>>>>>> Should this maybe get a configuration option?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Bernhard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>>>>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>>>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>