Hi all, A DRC error code is something like "Via inside keepout area", or in the code, DRCE_VIA_INSIDE_KEEPOUT. It describes a "type" of DRC error. This type is used for organizing the errors in the DRC report, and more recently, for letting you set a severity (error/warning/ignore) for each code.
Currently we have a lot of DRC violation types, probably because the violation types match up to the underlying code that is doing the checking. So, we also have a DRCE_MICROVIA_INSIDE_KEEPOUT and DRCE_BBVIA_INSIDE_KEEPOUT, because a lot of KiCad code has separate paths for those three types of vias. Do people find this useful? I think it is too specific: I would rather see a single code DRCE_VIA_INSIDE_KEEPOUT to include all types of vias. I could even see having a single code for any object inside a keepout that isn't supposed to be there. I can't imagine a situation where I would want to have a via inside a keepout be an error, but a microvia inside a keepout be a warning or an ignore (having the separate error codes means you can have seperate severity settings). If I wanted to know if a particular DRC error referred to a via or a microvia, I can do that from the linked item information -- I don't need a category to tell me that. What do you think? Does having a lot of very specific error codes help your workflow? Would you miss these categories if some of them got consolidated like the example I gave? If so, are there other changes we could make (or features we could add) that would make it easier to deal with having less specific error codes? Thanks, Jon _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
