kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[jp charras <jp.charras@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Le 09/06/2014 19:23, Lorenzo Marcantonio a écrit :
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 06:56:25PM +0200, jp charras wrote:
>> For guys who are interested by theses extensions (I am thinking a change
>> in Gerber Format should have a major interest for everybody), see:
> 
> The extension in themselves are quite interesting. If only to say 'this
> is the top layer' inside the file (and not using some other method).
> Could nearly replace D356, too.
> 
> The only problem will be acceptance by the tool manufacturers (i.e. will
> my fabricator accept X2 gerbers?)

The best way is to ask them for that.

> 
> I think that *maybe* in a few years we will know the answer.


Gerber X2 fixes a *major issue*: the stack order.
Therefore IMHO, accepting X2 gerbers is not a matter of years.

> 
> I skimmed the specs and, knowing the tools out there, X2 is *not*
> backward compatible. Most of the tools out there will probably choke
> horribly on the first %TF or %TA they encounter. The 'short header
> option' IIRC is there just to make the gerber readable anywere... It
> would be a truly backward compatible specification if they used some
> structured form of G04 (something like the structuring in postscript).
> IIRC it's not written anyway that 'any unknown mass parameter should be
> ignored'

After loading a GERBER X2 file:
Gerbview does not choke (run fine).
Gerb does not choke ( has only some warnings)
GC-Prevue does not choke ( has only one warning)

> 
> Drill files as plots are cute but nothing extraordinary; they could have
> their use but I don't see them replacing excellon or s&m tapes...

Excellon works fine, no need to replace this format.

> 
> I think a good way to implement attributes would be to make them
> optional (maybe putting them in a G04 block as a debug/documentation
> aid).
> 
> PS: somewhere in there they say that kicad does planes in the wrong way (who
> cares... I've seen worse things:D)

What do you mean? currently, Kicad does not know planes.
If you are talking about negative objects in Gerber files examples, I do
not see any reason to use negative objects in gerber files (at least for
copper layers): this is known as a bad practice.

> 
> PPS: in the list of the standard attributes there is a list of layer
> types; that could be very useful for the other thread!

I agree.
In examples, there is also an idea for gerber file names.


-- 
Jean-Pierre CHARRAS