Add inverted logic for Layers/Items visibility

Bug #1811355 reported by eelik on 2019-01-11
This bug affects 2 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone

Bug Description

See This is taken from there because the original idea and subject line of that report was changed. I think that inverting the logic of visibility rules of the Layers Manager has merit. It would allow different kinds of workflows. That should of course be optional.

Here is my comment from that report:

Possible solution which doesn't break existing workflows or behavior:

Add "Invert layer/item visibility logic" checkbox to Layers Manager -> Items list. That would invert the logic so that visibility logic would work like this:

1. Layers->Copper layer is unselected. So, start from "no items visible".
2. Also Fab and Silk layers (for references etc.) are unselected.
2. Items->Footprints is unselected. So, continue with "no footprints visible".
3. Items->References is selected. So, *show* references of footprints.
4. Items->Pads Front is selected. So, show front pads.
5. Items->Through Via is selected. So, show vias.

The result: only front pads, references and vias are visible. No other copper, silk or fab items (which are unselected).

See also

Application: kicad
Version: (6.0.0-rc1-dev-1512-gfe30460ae), release build
    wxWidgets 3.0.4
    libcurl/7.61.1 OpenSSL/1.1.1 (WinSSL) zlib/1.2.11 brotli/1.0.6 libidn2/2.0.5 libpsl/0.20.2 (+libidn2/2.0.5) nghttp2/1.34.0
Platform: Windows 7 (build 7601, Service Pack 1), 64-bit edition, 64 bit, Little endian, wxMSW
Build Info:
    wxWidgets: 3.0.4 (wchar_t,wx containers,compatible with 2.8)
    Boost: 1.68.0
    OpenCASCADE Community Edition: 6.9.1
    Curl: 7.61.1
    Compiler: GCC 8.2.0 with C++ ABI 1013

Build settings:

Wayne Stambaugh (stambaughw) wrote :

I don't think too many users would share your opinion. It was changed was because users found the original behavior confusing. I'm not opposed to making an inverted option but I doubt there will be a big flood of developers clamoring to implement it.

Changed in kicad:
status: New → Opinion
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Rene Poeschl (poeschlr) wrote :

The problem with relying on user reports is that you seldom hear from the ones who are satisfied with the current solution. Meaning your impression might fall under a slight bias towards the type of user who dislikes a system enough to report it as a problem.

NhatKhai (nhatkhai) wrote :

For the Silkscreen work, this request is very helpful.
To make this thing less confusing, I would think we need to restructure, or multiple pre-configuration drop down box for user to quickly switch to between couple major work modes.
And think part of confusing is because they are break out into the two tabs. Which all most make user not aware or understand the logic.

NhatKhai (nhatkhai) wrote :

It is about the way there been present.

NhatKhai (nhatkhai) wrote :

For example what if we display as following:

[ Current Setting \/ ] <--- Selection for difference configurations
(+) - Layers <-- Collapsible
 | + Top
 | + Cu1
 | + Cu2
 | + Bot
 | ....
 | + Mask
 | ....
(+) - Elements
    + Apply All Layers <-- Check this box will ignore layer filter for all elements (default unchecked)
    + VIAs
    + Traces
    + Zones
    + Top Elements
    + Bot Elements
    + References
    + Values
    + Hidden Elements

And setting come with installation may be:
* Everything
* Routing
* Silkscreen

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers