kicad-developers team mailing list archive
-
kicad-developers team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #28847
Re: [Patch] Add an option to select a reference point and an anchor in pcbnew move exactly dialog
-
To:
Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>, KiCad Developers <kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
-
From:
Robbert Lagerweij <rlagerweij@xxxxxxxxxxx>
-
Date:
Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:49:28 +0000
-
Accept-language:
en-US
-
Authentication-results:
gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com;
-
In-reply-to:
<6cfff58b-8b16-899e-f057-6f16c0e69834@gmail.com>
-
Spamdiagnosticmetadata:
NSPM
-
Spamdiagnosticoutput:
1:99
-
Thread-index:
AQHSkFnQN/3S7VYk50mbdq079zGGu6F8qSGAgACaoDWAAP5PgIAAInCogAACb4CAC5ACXYAUWF5ygAFGBwCAAZG70g==
-
Thread-topic:
[Kicad-developers] [Patch] Add an option to select a reference point and an anchor in pcbnew move exactly dialog
Thanks for the feedback Wayne.
In your test, did you explicitly set the user origin by pressing the space bar? The user origin is set to ( 0,0 ) by default, so if you haven't explicitly set the user origin to something else, it actually is "correct" behavior to move relative to the sheet origin.
But now that you point it out, correct is not necessarily expected behavior. I can add a check to see if the user origin is actually set and disable the choice if it isn't.
Would that be a useful addition?
Robbert
Sent with Outlook for Android
________________________________
From: Kicad-developers <kicad-developers-bounces+rlagerweij=hotmail.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:51:36 PM
To: kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] [Patch] Add an option to select a reference point and an anchor in pcbnew move exactly dialog
I did some quick testing on this and the move relative the user origin
always moves relative to the page origin. Everything else appears to
work as expected.
On 3/20/2017 4:31 PM, Robbert Lagerweij wrote:
> Just a gentle bump on this patch. I have rebased it on master today.
>
> As said, I'm more than happy to rip out the legacy canvas stuff if this is the preference. Also happy to take on board any other comments or suggestions for changes.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Robbert
>
>
> From: Robbert Lagerweij <rlagerweij@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 11:16 PM
> To: John Beard
> Cc: Tomasz Wlostowski; KiCad Developers
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] [Patch] Add an option to select a reference point and an anchor in pcbnew move exactly dialog
>
> Well, I finally had some time to look at improving this patch.
>
> This version has the coding style policy issue fixed ( and uncrustified ). Inspired by Thomas' comment I removed some duplication in the selection_tool code.
> Given that I haven't received any further comments other than those of John, I've left the duplication between GAL and Legacy in.
>
> Please let me know if anyone has any further suggestions to improve this.
>
> Robbert
>
> From: John Beard <john.j.beard@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 2:08 PM
> To: Robbert Lagerweij
> Cc: Tomasz Wlostowski; KiCad Developers
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] [Patch] Add an option to select a reference point and an anchor in pcbnew move exactly dialog
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Robbert Lagerweij
> <rlagerweij@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> Thank you for your feedback. The duplication of code is indeed not how I
>> would usually approach this but I thought it the lesser of two evils given
>> the fact that the legacy stuff will most likely be deprecated immediately
>> after the 5.0 release. This means that long term maintainability is not
>> really affected since there will be limited chance of structural changes
>> needed to that part of the code (presumably only 5.x bug fixes) .
>
> Since the work is done already in Legacy, I'd vote to leave it in.
> Duplicating code is paradoxically probably the cleanest way, as when
> legacy gets the chop, the GAL code will be unaffected. Combining the
> code is probably more likely to need tidying up in future that isn't
> just deleting one of the call sites.
>
>> If we go the GAL only route, since legacy and GAL use the same dialog, I
>> could either create a new dialog which we only use in GAL or add additional
>> logic to disable/hide the functionality in legacy.
>
> I think a new dialog is overkill and not worth the effort since the
> legacy work is done. At most, a constructor parameter to hide relevant
> UI controls would suffice, and be easy to rip out later.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Follow ups
References