Dear Mr. Atommann,
But shouldn’t JLCPCB, your company, not simply support X2 by now? It was introduced 7 years ago, ample time to adapt. X2 add really useful information, such as where the via’s are - no more guesswork.
The minimal support for X2 is really simple: just ignore the %Txxx attribute commands. The conformance statement in the spec clearly states that this is exactly what a reader must do: “To prepare for future extensions of the format, a Gerber file reader must give a warning when encountering an unknown command; it must then continue processing after otherwise ignoring the unknown construct.” Is it too much to ask to use conforming Gerber software?
Even if your software crashes on X2, supporting X2 only takes a simple script to remove the %T commands. (As a side effect it can create a report which tools are the vias, what your CAM surely needs to know.) If using conforming software is too much to ask, is it also too much to ask to develop such a simple script?
I also read you have problems with basic features of macro’s, which are part of 274X since the 1980’s. Is it too much to ask that you can correctly read valid Gerber files that only use features more than thirty years old?
By refusing X2 JLCPCB and other prototype vendors effectively block designers from using X2, effectively blocking the industry from moving forward and force it to remain mired in the 1980. By refusing X2 JLCPCB create needless problems for users of KiCad, and needless work for its developers, that surely have better things to do. As amply demonstrated by this and other posts.
Please move on with the times, and support X2, fully and without complaining. Please?