delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Message-ID: | <53EA540E.9000609@sonic.net> |
Date: | Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:51:10 -0700 |
From: | Dave Curtis <davecurtis AT sonic DOT net> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.2 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | [geda-user] rs-274x nits |
X-Sonic-CAuth: | UmFuZG9tSVbv08asYfse6cxtI9gUaB1buLiq2DDacYBVtNkCgcLZWy8fUuGf/Tw+p7f+9PXz3DWRSultJ9tfW7ptl9xNB8fWzE8vwu4t3ZQ= |
X-Sonic-ID: | C;gh6OPkki5BGHNt90oK8kYw== M;fGokP0ki5BGHNt90oK8kYw== |
X-Spam-Flag: | No |
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: | 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd |
X-MIME-Autoconverted: | from 8bit to quoted-printable by c.mail.sonic.net id s7CHpAXE012030 |
X-MIME-Autoconverted: | from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id s7CHpMpR012032 |
Reply-To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
I'm trying to interpret the gerber format specification document authored by Ucamco. 1. On page 35 it says: The line separators CR and LF have no effect; they can be ignored when processing the file. It is recommended to use line separators to improve human readability. 2. On page 36 it says: It is recommended to add line separators between data blocks for readability. Do not put a line separator within a data block, except after a comma separator in long data blocks. The line separators have no effect on the image. 3. on page 40, talking about closing parameter blocks it says: The ‘%’ must immediately follow the ‘*’ of the last data block without intervening line separators. This is an exception to the general rule that a data block can be followed by a line separator. #3 is clear enough. #1 and #2 seem to be in conflict. A strict reading of #1 would say that CR and LF should simply be expunged, and that CR/LF could even split G-coded, numbers, etc., like this: G 03 X 123 * Which seems odd, but is a result of strict reading of #1. But is in conflict with the advice of #2. It's easy enough to comply with the advice of #2 while writing. But if reading RS-274X, should CR/LF's that split lexical units be ignored? Although I realize that even if legal, I doubt if anyone writes gerber that way. -dave
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |