Group References into ranges

[justyn]

For boards where there are many identical components, it would be good to have the option to group references together like KiField does.

For example instead of:

R1, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10

you could have:

R1, R4-R10

[SchrodingersGat]

I like that - it would be nice to have that as an option flag (I wouldn't want to use such a feature all the time)

[schneidersoft]

Let me know if you'd rather want R8,R11,R12,R21-R42 or R8,R11-R12,R21-R42 ... should groups of 2+ get a - or only groups of 3+

[SchrodingersGat]

I think 3+ makes sense. Are you going to implement this? :)

[schneidersoft]

Yup. Should be up momentarily.

On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 15:45 -0700, Oliver wrote:

I think 3+ makes sense. Are you going to implement this? :)

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

     

{"api_version":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c5 5493e4bb","name":"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/Schroding ersGat/KiBoM","title":"SchrodingersGat/KiBoM","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/ass ets/143418/17495839/a5054eac-5d88-11e6-95fc- 7290892c7bb5.png","avatar_image_url":"https://cloud.githubusercontent .com/assets/143418/15842166/7c72db34-2c0b-11e6-9aed- b52498112777.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/SchrodingersGat/KiBoM"}},"updates": {"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@SchrodingersGat in #13: I think 3+ makes sense. Are you going to implement this? :)"}],"action":{"name":"View Issue","url":"https://github.com/SchrodingersGat/KiBoM/issues/13#issu ecomment-305339300"}}}

[KarlZeilhofer]

@schneidersoft how about the implementation of this feature?

I've one additional feature request:

C201 C204-C211 C308 C310 C313 C412 C601 C602-C610 C613

would be still a very wide cell in the spread sheet. I would prefer a line break after N entries, e.g. 5

C201 C204-C211 C308 C310
C313 C412 C601 C602-C610
C613

Once I've written my own BOM-tool in C, which had this feature, it was exported with \n, which was displayed correctly in libre office calc.

[schneidersoft]

Ok. so you want to word wrap to N words. where each entry C201, C202 etc. is a word. your example works when N is 4 or 5 even 6,7,8 but not 2,3,or 9. What happens when N is 2?

C201 C204- C211 C308 C310 C313 C412 C601 C602-C610 C613

When N is 3 C201 C204-C211 C308 C310 C313 C412 C601 C602- C610 C613

Uggly much? Are you suggesting we alter the hyphenation? N=2: C201 C204 C205-C211 C308 C310 C313 C412 C601 C602 C603-C610 C613

alternatively leave the hyphenated set on in the same row: N=2: C201 C201-C211 C308 C310 C313 C412 C601 C602-C610 C613

or move it to a new one N=2: C201 C204-C211 C308 C310 C313 C412 C601 C602-C610 C613

[KarlZeilhofer]

I would prefer the last option. setting N to 2 is not used in daily life, I think.

If we use N=5, then in worst case there are some lines with only 4 entries...

C201 C204-C211 C301 C308 
C310 C313 C412 C601 
C602-C610 C613 C617 C619
C621

Are you going to implement this?

[schneidersoft]

Yes. I have implemented it.

[KarlZeilhofer]

@schneidersoft Thanks! Where can I find it and how can I use it?

[KarlZeilhofer]

@SchrodingersGat I saw, this ferature wasn't merged into this master branch, why not?

[schneidersoft]

you can always pull from my repo. But it would be better to get the changes merged into this one.

[SchrodingersGat]

@schneidersoft I can't see an open PR for this feature - have I mistakenly closed it, or have you not opened one?

[schneidersoft]

PR #19 incorporates this feature and a few others. I made a bunch of changes one after the other., and only one PR. I don't know if that's the correct way of doing things.

[SchrodingersGat]

19 is merged now - OK to close this issue?

[schneidersoft]

Sure

[KarlZeilhofer]

Looks great now. Here's an example:

3 things I'd like to notice:

1. This feature is not documented in the README.md
2. alt_wrap only works, if use_alt is set to 1. For documentation only, this is quite okay, but in some cases, where we do a manual pick and place, I like to check every reference with a pencil on paper. But this doesn't work any more, if the references are grouped in ranges.
3. perhaps the options should have a better naming: wrap_ref_count instead of alt_wrap and
   use_ref_ranges instead of use_alt