Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PCB positioning in Inspector is inaccurate #3902

Closed
vanepp opened this issue Nov 5, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

PCB positioning in Inspector is inaccurate #3902

vanepp opened this issue Nov 5, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@vanepp
Copy link
Contributor

vanepp commented Nov 5, 2021

Current Behaviour

Someone is trying to set holes in pcb view at exact coordinates but can not do so. First make sure snap to grid is disabled, so grid snapping isn't the problem:

capture

place 4 holes in pcb and try and set the top left one's X coordinate to 50mm via Inspector:

capture1

when the change takes place, the x coordinate is wrong:

capture2

instead of 50mm we get 49.972mm. When I do the same to the bottom left hole (set the x coord to 50mm) we get 49.985mm (same input, two different outputs!)

capture3

entering 129 (50mm + 79mm) and 10mm on the right top hole results in 128.987mm and 10.016mm.
It would be desirable (but perhaps not possible due to floating point roundoff) to have the numbers be exact. As well it would be desirable that incrementing the value via the up and down arrows in Inspector moved in even increments (such as 1mm or .1in) which they don't at present:

capture4

1 click of the up arrow went from 128.987 to 130.009 instead of an even increment (although this is less important if exact values can be manually set!)

capture5

Build:

Version 0.9.9
(bCD-348-0-f0af53a9 2021-09-22) 64 [Qt 5.15.2]

Operating System:
Windows 10

Steps to reproduce:

See behaviour

Expected Behaviour

The exact value set in to Inspector becomes the coordinate

@failiz
Copy link
Contributor

failiz commented Nov 15, 2021

Duplicate of #3639.

@failiz
Copy link
Contributor

failiz commented May 13, 2022

@vanepp or @KjellMorgenstern , if you think that this is a duplicate of #3639, please, close the issue. If not, please, highlight the differences (or me, they are identical).

@vanepp
Copy link
Contributor Author

vanepp commented May 29, 2022

Yes it appears to be a dup of #3639. I'll close this one.

@vanepp vanepp closed this as completed May 29, 2022
KjellMorgenstern pushed a commit that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants