pcbjam/docs/features/editor-unification

Editor build unification — one WASM build per kiface + a runtime frame flag

Status: Part 1 AND Part 2 IMPLEMENTED (2026-07-02) — see 05-part1-implementation.md and 06-part2-implementation.md. All four editors are now runtime --frame choices of the ONE merged kicad_editor bundle. Originally authored 2026-06-30 as a research / decision record from a 5-agent read of the KiCad source (kicad/ submodule) and our WASM build. The question: several of our 7 WASM "apps" are the same compiled code differing only by a build-time constant — can we collapse them to one build that picks the editor at runtime? Companion to ../symbol-editor/ (which established the second-launcher pattern this doc proposes to retire) and ../perf/README.md (the size context).

Why this exists

We ship 7 separate WASM apps (pcbnew, footprint_editor, eeschema, symbol_editor, gerbview, pl_editor, calculator). Two pairs of them are byte-for-byte near-duplicates:

artifact	size	what it is	differs from its twin by
pcbnew.wasm	146 MB	board editor	—
footprint_editor.wasm	146 MB	footprint editor	one compile macro (TOP_FRAME)
eeschema.wasm	82 MB	schematic editor	—
symbol_editor.wasm	82 MB	symbol editor	one compile macro (TOP_FRAME)
gerbview / pl_editor / calculator	42 / 44 / 30 MB	separate engines	(genuinely different code)

The Footprint Editor is not a separate program — it is a frame compiled inside the pcbnew module; the Symbol Editor is a frame inside eeschema. KiCad already selects which editor a module opens at runtime, by passing a FRAME_T enum value to a single factory (KIFACE::CreateKiWindow). The only thing we pin at build time is which frame the launcher opens (TOP_FRAME in common/single_top.cpp:420). So footprint_editor.wasm is a complete copy of the pcbnew engine with one integer changed.

This dossier evaluates two changes the user proposed:

1. Part 1 — pair each editor with its own library editor (PCB Editor + Footprint Editor → one build; Schematic Editor + Symbol Editor → one build), selecting the frame at runtime.
2. Part 2 — fuse all four editors (really the two engines, pcbnew + eeschema) into one app with a runtime flag to switch views.

TL;DR / decision

• Part 1 — DONE ✅ (implemented + validated end-to-end, incl. the real web app; see 05-part1-implementation.md). A small, free win, as predicted. The pair is already one kiface; the kiface's CreateKiWindow already has both frame arms, and KifaceType() maps both frames to the same face — so the single registered kiface already serves both. The only blocker is the baked-in TOP_FRAME at common/single_top.cpp:420. Make that a runtime input (mirror the upstream --frame parser in kicad/kicad.cpp:130-164) and the duplicate build disappears. Zero download penalty (the dup bundle is already a full copy of its twin). Removes 228 MB of duplicated WASM, their ~1.6 GB-each debug DWARF sidecars, and 2 build/deploy/test targets. See 03-part1-library-editor-unification.md.
• Part 2 is feasible and well-bounded, but moderate — and a product call, not a dedup win. Two engines in one image is new ground (no template — the upstream project manager that does this natively isn't built for WASM, and the WASM KIWAY asserts exactly one kiface). The collision surface is small and concentrated: the load-bearing item is the global Kiface() accessor (two definitions, ~97 call sites incl. shared common/ code), which must become a runtime dispatch on the active editor. The KIFACE_GETTER symbol clash everyone fears first is trivial. The real cost is size: a merged binary is ~180–190 MB that every user downloads, which fights our per-tool lazy loading. See 04-part2-single-app-merge.md.
• They are not either/or. Part 1 builds the runtime-frame mechanism that Part 2 reuses, so Part 1 is the natural first step regardless. Ship Part 1 now; gate Part 2 on whether the product wants a unified, project-based "KiCad in the browser" (cross-probing schematic↔PCB).
• Do not build the user's literally-crossed pairing (PCB + Symbol, or Schematic + Footprint). Those don't share code, so each bundle would link both engines — all of Part 2's cost with none of Part 1's sharing benefit.

Document index

File	Contents
01-current-build-structure.md	What we build today: the 7 apps, the two duplicate pairs (with sizes), the build-time TOP_FRAME selection, and how JS picks an editor by loading a different bundle. The as-built baseline, with evidence.
02-kiface-architecture.md	Primer on KiCad's kiway / kiface / FRAME_T / single_top system — the upstream mechanism that already selects editors at runtime. The "one module, many frames, chosen by a runtime parameter" contract.
03-part1-library-editor-unification.md	Part 1. Pair each editor with its own library editor. Why it's trivial, the exact minimal change, why it costs nothing to download, the cost/benefit, and the caveats.
04-part2-single-app-merge.md	Part 2. Fuse the engines into one app. The full symbol-collision surface (Kiface() is the real work; the getter is trivial), the size tradeoff, when it's worth it, and extending to all 7 tools.
05-part1-implementation.md	Part 1 — as-built (implemented). The implementation record: exactly what changed (C++ / build / frontend / tests), how the runtime --frame mechanism works, corrections to the research (argv is delivered; PGM_DATA_FILE_EXT on all four), validation (harness + regression + real web app + demo), and the current git/build state.
06-part2-implementation.md	Part 2 — as-built (implemented). The merged kicad_editor image: the per-engine Kiface/getter binding, the 21-symbol ODR audit the research missed (+ the repeatable audit script), the embind split/dispatcher, build/frontend/test wiring, validation results, and the one known pre-existing 3d-viewer failure (fixed on main).

Relationship to other feature docs

• ../symbol-editor/0001-symbol-editor-port.md — established the "second single_top launcher, same kiface, different TOP_FRAME" pattern for symbol_editor. Part 1 generalizes that to a runtime TOP_FRAME and retires the separate launcher entirely.
• ../perf/README.md — the size context. Part 1's dedup is orthogonal to the size levers there (it removes duplicate artifacts, not per-binary bloat); Part 2's size cost must be weighed against them (wasm-split/dlopen are already a dead end there, which is why a merged binary can't be lazily sub-loaded).
• Build entry points: docker/build.sh, scripts/kicad/build-kicad-target.sh.
• Launcher / dispatch: kicad/common/single_top.cpp, kicad/common/kiway.cpp, kicad/pcbnew/pcbnew.cpp, kicad/eeschema/eeschema.cpp, kicad/include/frame_type.h.