X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <53EA8692.4090902@sonic.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:26:42 -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: Re: [geda-user] rs-274x nits
References: <53EA540E DOT 9000609 AT sonic DOT net> <1407876579 DOT 79247 DOT YahooMailNeo AT web120502 DOT mail DOT ne1 DOT yahoo DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <1407876579.79247.YahooMailNeo@web120502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVagux2W4IypbUiGWYkAW6WpZoWQo24Pb1TmyObmGwRg4/9iPqjZTdQAWyfhSYYVo2cXzjsubty9mYIWmyR7fIUy8H47Y/gA78g=
X-Sonic-ID: C;UlumWmci5BG/X990oK8kYw== M;rPUVW2ci5BG/X990oK8kYw==
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 s7CLQgDp026255
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id s7CLQm5a027036
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On 08/12/2014 01:49 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>> From: Dave Curtis <davecurtis AT sonic DOT net>
>> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 3:51 AM
>> 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.
>>
>> 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
>>
>
> There is no conflict at all:
>
> 1. The CR/LF are optional; you do not need them but they are recommended
> to make the file look better to humans.
>
> 2. If you use CR/LF to make a data block look prettier, you can only use
> CR/LF after a comma.

NO!  That directly conflicts with #1 "CR and LF no effect."  Which is it?


>
> - Cirilo
>
>