kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Wouldn't translating them defeat the purpose?  I thought the goal was
consistency.  If you translate them, they will be different for each
language and render code like kicost somewhat useless.

On 05/22/2018 05:52 PM, Kristoffer Ödmark wrote:
> Yes, the only way to make them translateable is to hard-code these and
> other values into kicad, same as the existing hard-coded fields.
> 
> That would be a good solution for me, having similar to layers a large
> set of predefined fields, being able to name them and enable them at
> will. But storing them in the files as the hard-codes values.
> 
> This means a large change to the code though, at least if we must have
> the enable/disable feature for this, along with creating new custom
> fields. Not even the PCB editor has this yet. 
> 
> Also, I don't think any of the bom exporter plug-ins are localized, and
> at least one of them completely ignores custom fields and adds it own
> instead, regardless of what is in the file.
> 
> Meanwhile my patch does not affect existing installations, does not
> change any BOM, and does not enforce anything and comes in at a whooping
> 3-4 lines of patch in a single file. It will however add 3 lines to two
> dialogs (field editor and symbol editor) for new installations, which
> can be removed, with 6 clicks of the mouse in eeschema. 
> 
> - Kristoffer 
> 
> On Tue, May 22, 2018, 20:01 Jeff Young <jeff@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:jeff@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     I can confirm that default fields only get added when the symbol is
>     edited AND the default field’s value is non-empty.  So it doesn’t
>     seem to me that the proposed patch would pollute existing BOMs.  Or
>     am I missing something?
> 
>     Seth’s comment regarding localisation is an issue, though, as we
>     don’t currently translate default fields.
> 
>     > On 22 May 2018, at 17:53, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>     >
>     > On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Jeff Young wrote:
>     >>> It should output all fields defined in schematic symbols
>     regardless if
>     >>> each optional field is defined in every symbol.  If they are
>     outputting
>     >>> anything other than that, I would consider this a bug.
>     >>
>     >> I had trouble parsing this.  Are you saying that the list of
>     output fields should be the union of all fields which have a value
>     somewhere (but excluding default fields which are uniformly blank)?
>     >
>     > Yes.  It should be the equivalent of a logical OR.  If a field
>     exists in
>     > a single symbol, it should get added to the BOM.
>     >
>     >>
>     >> As it stands in 5.0, default fields don’t get pushed to symbols
>     unless the symbol is edited.  At that point I’m not sure if they’re
>     all pushed, or only those with values.
>     >>
>     >
>     > It used to be that fields only get saved when they are added to the
>     > symbol using the edit symbol properties dialog.  That code has
>     changed a
>     > lot since it was originally written so I cannot confirm this.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>