Now that is starting to sound like philosophy. A treatise titled, “Critique of Pure Grasshopper ”
I have seen a project or two that they used Grasshopper, with a little scripting. The programmers could have done it all in Scripting. But Grasshopper became the interface that the designers could use and interact directly with the design realtime. By the way I updated the file on the group. It seemed that some were having trouble reading it. - Scott On Oct 30, 4:02 pm, visose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's cheating! :P > I thought the fun part was to try to do as much as possible with the > components without having to fall back to scripting. For practical > purposes sure, i find myself actually using the function component to > avoid using a list of other vector, scalar, etc. components. But > wheres the line? I'm afraid if i learn too much vb.net i'll end up > ditching grasshopper and installing visual studio. I guess the line is > what takes the least amount of effort for what you are trying to > achieve. > > On Oct 30, 10:21 pm, Splash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Ok, here is a super simple sorter. I found if I use a List data type > > in the code. I noticed David using those to inclrease the number of > > outputs on a component. I can load up the output with multiple objects > > on each loop. > > > It is much cleaner now: > > >http://groups.google.com/group/grasshopper3d/web/Alternate%20Sort%20c... > > > On Oct 27, 11:17 am, visose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Sorry when i say "...with another list that has 0.1 as the step > > > size..." i mean with another series component. I really miss the edit > > > button in this forum. I guess it's not possible with newsgroups. > > > > On Oct 27, 7:07 pm, visose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > heh, actually i had it with the merge streams component, but i removed > > > > them just to make it look smaller. but you are right, better use the > > > > merge component so you don't have to know which list you linked > > > > first. > > > > About multiple lists, you could substitute the number parameter that > > > > has 0 and 0.1 with another list that has 0.1 as the step size and the > > > > number of lists you want as the number of values to output (or 0.001 > > > > if you have more than 10 lists). If all the lists are the same size > > > > you only need one length component. > > > > > On Oct 27, 6:46 pm, taz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > viscose, > > > > > > I like your stiching solution. > > > > > > It might be a good idea to combine the lists with a Merge component > > > > > before sorting (for clarity), otherwise the first value of the stiched > > > > > list will correspond with whichever list was first attached to Sort. > > > > > > But I still like the minimalist approach for only 2 lists... > > > > > > taz > > > > > > On Oct 27, 12:50 pm, Splash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > That is very creative. I like the way your tagged the second series > > > > > > as 0.1. > > > > > > > This method could be used to sort as many different lists as you > > > > > > need. > > > > > > > Thanks.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
