"Better" handling for 3-point junctions

[mr-september]

Not sure how to properly describe this, but basically a hole is opening up at 3-point junctions. I don't think this has practical consequences, but I also barely know anything about electronics to have any confidence in that.

Before:

After:

Ideally, the hole should be closed, and the thicker line should taper smoothly into the thinner line, but I don't know if that's possible/feasible to implement in code. Maybe the recommended teardrop script could help with the tapering?

[mitxela]

I suppose we could fix this by making the plugin leave a short track in the middle to fill the hole, but that wouldn't be very satisfying. I think the only way to get decent T-junctions, especially if the tracks are different widths, would be to do it with zone fills.

I think I might add a checkbox to just ignore multi-point junctions. Then, if I feel up to it, I could add T-junction handling to the teardrop script.

[daf0x]

Hmm, I thought I had a workaround, and maybe I sort-off do, but I guess it's probably more a bug. I can't really seem to figure out how to reproduce it though. Sometimes it's possible to construct a three-way junction like this that doesn't get curved after running the plug-in. I thought it had something to with the order and/or direction in which you connect the tracks, but I can't produce it on demand.

A workaround that does seem to work is to give one of the arms a very small offset:

Another option is to make a connection like this, to connect the incoming arm to a longer section of track without adding a connecting 'node' (notice how the track is not split into two pieces). This is fine for connectivity/DRC, but doesn't seem to count as a connection that the plug-in will work on. I think it's treated as just two straight segments. I think I somehow sometimes managed to manoeuvre a connection like this into the first (angled three-way-split) configuration.

[tpimh]

I wonder if it's a viable solution to leave the junctions untouched by rounding plugin and handle them with teardrop plugin instead?

Update: just read the thread and saw the very same idea with almost the same wording. Sorry for posting before reading.