X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type;
        bh=l0Qx8WegipR5nElXc2JunZ4bZ40trQdHgCBag2GyguI=;
        b=jnMNg3Sk9+2+4gFT7kotwUbuRiczKaybJY5u48sNHF9CI7U057PeH/yZ15GaWR4r09
         xR17OYeUK9N1yP8d6g7nmFvFOcYF8dGBEcXTqDbUx+8dAWyMojFIf1yrxZOhsURecA1h
         rAPvq0rvAXMRVTkv4XY5/j7nsB47LvlcwdbTcVQy2LLqbfzkYgYVoafDU4zqL+WTVOar
         fRSfW5k/OjtayRk46l3wLlPWYR4Ou9uiOTnQWsh5+zVBubRzUG5ETASFUDZv5NPuEiL1
         NYFdCHvV7yseuIkxEJHYnVSIdKBPVCSrQA0yfRkuLtRYnBSfRMkG8nwt6+fL54HE6/JG
         zIRQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnR7lVZ/Objwuw/JOyi/xK9EkYBn+PDs6ekqP2Wh9PT/9ZgYcGZYKvWlHRfAis/7C7uWzwU
X-Received: by 10.42.226.69 with SMTP id iv5mr531024icb.43.1407869208204; Tue,
 12 Aug 2014 11:46:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dave Kerber <dkerber AT warrenrogersassociates DOT com>
References: <53EA540E DOT 9000609 AT sonic DOT net>
In-Reply-To: <53EA540E.9000609@sonic.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-Index: Ac+2WKlArDRxjrlgSdODsyNkEQzW6QABHnIQ
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.1.7601.17609
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:46:47 -0400
Message-ID: <2aabf5abd73cc057e4a0193bf4a2d101@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [geda-user] rs-274x nits
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Curtis [mailto:davecurtis AT sonic DOT net]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 1:51 PM
> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
> Subject: [geda-user] rs-274x nits
>
> 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.

I don't see any conflict there.  #1 is saying that *when processing* you
must ignore line breaks, but it is recommended to put them in for
readability.  Your example of splitting G-codes, etc, certainly does NOT
improve readability.

#2 is saying to put line blocks where they will improve readability, just
not at random spots in a data block.


>
> 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
>
>