Topic for #qi-hardware is now Copyleft hardware - http://qi-hardware.com | hardware hackers join here to discuss Ben NanoNote, atben / atusb 802.15.4 wireless, and other community driven hw projects | public logging at http://en.qi-hardware.com/irclogs
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspra1l has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
wolfspra1l has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
wolfspra1l has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
rejon has joined #qi-hardware
cladamw has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
jeremybrown82 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
rejon has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Ayla has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Ayla has joined #qi-hardware
jurting has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Ayla has quit [Quit: dodo]
wej has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
wej has joined #qi-hardware
<wpwrak>
cladamw: glad you're having fun :-) i think part of that may also be that fped allows you to think in more abstract terms. so each thing you do has a more powerful effect.
<wpwrak>
regarding the suppression of pins: the most direct way of suppressing pins would be to have a table, keyed by the pin's number, that says whether the pin should be shown or not
<wpwrak>
ah wait, and we can rename them in the process, too
<cladamw>
yeah ... my problem is that I've not familiar with its conceipt of expression. :-)
<wpwrak>
yeah, works perfectly :)
<cladamw>
so if the table above it can do with just one pads frame not using two pads_t and pads_b, then i eventaully knows that table. :-)
<cladamw>
since i still don't know the how syntax it is. :-O
<wpwrak>
(expressions) the way fped does things is a bit unusual. that's because everything has to work in a reasonably natural way in a "script" and in the GUI. so it's a mix of procedural and declarative concepts.
<cladamw>
hehe ... could you use pastebin for me the optimized codes ?
<wpwrak>
you mean a modified eus.fpd ?
<cladamw>
yeah ... correct explainative mix of both procedural and declarative ones.
<cladamw>
(modified eus.fpd) yes. :-)
<cladamw>
but maybe your Fped is updated latestly not like mine now so that i not sure if Fped can interprete it.
<wpwrak>
if you want to understand the finer details of fped, you should look at the script language, described in README. i think it's easier to understand the structure of things there
<wpwrak>
yes, you need the latest fped for this kind of thing to work :)
<cladamw>
phew ~ script again.
<cladamw>
my priority one may not to learn it now, hehe ... keep building those needed m1r4's modules.
<wpwrak>
i think it's a good moment to learn what you want to learn
<wpwrak>
since you have a lot of opportunities to use it on real-life problems. that makes it much easier to learn.
<cladamw>
i have time goal now. :-)
<wpwrak>
ah ?
<wpwrak>
has wolfgang given you a deadline ?
<cladamw>
so maybe yesterday you mentioned another expression for older ver. of Fped. Can it ?
<cladamw>
Does Fped have another expression for such for my current Fped ?
<wpwrak>
(looking at eus.fpd) pin_b and pin_t are nearly identical. is there any specific reason why you didn't use the same frame for both types of pins ?
<cladamw>
wpwrak, yeah ... i tried but failed in using 'if' ... hehe
<cladamw>
then i seperate 'pin' into *_[b:t] frames. :-O
<wpwrak>
(old-style) you could just enumerate the pins: table { pos, name } { 1, 1 } { 2, 2 } { 3, 3 } { 4, 4 } { 5, 5 } { 8, 6 }
<wpwrak>
and remove the loop
<wpwrak>
what i called "pos" would be "i" in your case
<wpwrak>
(using if) hmm. you shouldn't need an "if" here
<cladamw>
All roads lead to Rome. (even I knew it's not smart codes but tried ) ha ...
<wpwrak>
the only possible problem i see with simplifying things is that it may be harder to get measurements. but let's see ...
<cladamw>
(olde-style) okay ... next module if the same case I'll try. :-)
<wpwrak>
by the way, to verify footprints, when you generate a postscript file and print it, fped will put one drawing at the real size. so if you have the component at hand, you can put it on the paper and verify that the footprint does indeed look right
<wpwrak>
thinking of it, the old-style approach is actually more efficient in this case :)
<cladamw>
wpwrak, okay ... that's i'd like to know from you. ( efficient) :-) thanks telling me. :-O
xwalk has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<wpwrak>
oh, and eus.fpd linke pins_t from frame outline. i think you want to link it from the root frame :)
<qi-bot>
[commit] Werner Almesberger: b2/: new option -v to control verbosity level; move hierarchy dump from parser to boom.c (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/eda-tools/b0ed436
<qi-bot>
[commit] Werner Almesberger: b2/test/Common: drop that tacky "file-" prefix in pseudo-filenames (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/eda-tools/52e58cc
<qi-bot>
[commit] Werner Almesberger: b2/lang.y: don't pop fields from the stack before also handling the rule (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/eda-tools/a892b63