| ID: | 5995 |
| From: | rn...@igor2.repo.hu |
| Date: | Mon, 13 Mar 2023 12:23:05 +0100 (CET) |
| Subject: | Re: [pcb-rnd] Bug: extended objects are considered components for |
| in-reply-to: | 5994 from Gabriel Paubert <pa...@iram.es> |
| replies: | 5997 from Bdale Garbee <bd...@gag.com> |
Hi Gabriel,
On Mon, 13 Mar 2023, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> Hello Igor2,
>
>On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 10:04:30AM +0100, rnd2@igor2.repo.hu wrote:
>> Hello Gabriel,
>>
>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2023, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Igor2,
>> >
>> >since you introduced extended objects in pcb-rnd, I've used them a bit
>> >for differential lines and busses.
>> >
>> >But they have a funny side effect, these extended objects appear in the
>> >bom file, in the assembly window (":asm"), and also in the xy file with
>> >the following message:
>> >
>> >xy: can't get subc side for (unknown)
>> >
>> >I strongly suspect that the bug is that extended objects are included in
>> >these lists by mistake.
>> >
>> >Example lht file attached, with bom and xy.
>>
>>
>> Thank you, the example files were very useful.
>>
>> I've commit a series of small fixes ending at r37346 to make some of the
>> plugins ignore extended objects - typically those that deal with physical
>> parts. The 3 you've found are included.
>>
>> Please test!
>
>Thank you, this fixes all the issues I've met when exporting .xy and
>.bom files, as well as hand assembly.
Cool, thanks for reporting!
>On the other hand I've got a problem with DRC but I have trouble
>distilling a test case: a layout which gives 0 drc errors with an old
>version finds hundreds of them with a more recent version.
>
>I'm still trying to find the cause, it might be a pilot error.
>(I don't know how to make regression testing with svn, is there an
>equivalent of "git bisect"?)
We have a bisect helper script in trunk/util/bisecter
but since we have librnd in a separate repo, bisecting became harder
because you always need to make sure the right major version of librnd is
available and we just had a major version change there recently. Plus in
some cases the bug you are after is not in pcb-rnd but in librnd.
At the end of the day a test case or a recipe for reproducing the problem
is more valuable for me than a revision number where it broke. Being able
to reproduce the problem is a must for fixing it and validating the fix.
Given a reproduction path, bisecting to the revision where it broke is
cheap. Hiven a revision where somehting broke, constructing an example
that demonstrates how it breaks is often much harder.
Best regards,
Igor2
Reply subtree:
5995 Re: [pcb-rnd] Bug: extended objects are considered components for from rn...@igor2.repo.hu
5997 Re: [pcb-rnd] Bug: extended objects are considered components for from Bdale Garbee <bd...@gag.com>
5998 Re: [pcb-rnd] Bug: extended objects are considered components for from rn...@igor2.repo.hu
5999 Re: [pcb-rnd] Bug: extended objects are considered components for from Bdale Garbee <bd...@gag.com>