I tend to use ICE as a sort of SCOP testbed, especially if the maths is a little complicated it's easier to dev the system there and re-write into Python later. The only exception would be if I needed to make use of locations/geometry queries. But then it's still easier to store a custom attribute then read that into a script.
On 7 February 2013 02:02, Raffaele Fragapane <[email protected]>wrote: > I mean output to an ICE par, not to a CP par, which is akin to hitting > your testicles with a large mallet. > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:07 AM, joshxsi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> FYI, outputting to a parameter to ICE is around 10x slower than >> outputting to a transform, so I highly recommend that if performance is a >> requirement, never output from ICE into a parameter. >> >> Cheers, >> -j >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Raffaele Fragapane < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> You might be better off decoupling the length computation, which tends >>> to be expensive with any high order surface or curve, and output it to a >>> parameter you fetch from graphs further down the stream. >>> That way you should save a fair chunk of cycles. >>> >>> If you need to keep them aligned you could also use some tricks to >>> basically reduce the dirtyness to a simpler check, like comparing point >>> positions before you start integrating your length function. >>> >> >> > > > -- > Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it > and let them flee like the dogs they are! >
