algorithmic modeling for Rhino
I was involved in a smallish debate recently about if code is the "right" way to do business (VS GH components):
Anyway I'm the lest person to provide advises about what each user should do, but in case that you are considering Plan B ... here's a sampling of some (already posted I believe) 30 C# cases in a vast variety of complexity (out of about 315 available).
You have a point about coding, a few actually. Rhino offers several ways to add functionality via coding like scripting or the plugin SDK. That only raises the question: Why do you even bother using Grasshopper?
Then there's the other thing about this forum. It's called Grasshopper3D.com for a reason. People come here to find solutions using Grasshopper. There are things that can't be done in pure GH. But some people are better expressing their thoughts in a graphical way instead of using a cryptic language. Offering a single C# block to every problem posted does not help people to understand what Grasshopper can do or how to solve problems within the context of this program.
Your posts are like the guy on the MS Word forums telling people to use Adobe stuff because it's so much more advanced and nice and professional, completely ignoring thousands of professional projects that are entirely done in Word. You may have a point, but after a while you will start to just piss off people.
So thank you for contributing but try to focus on what this forum is actually about.
As I said many times I see things solely from the AEC perspective. This means many apps/many people combined.
Most importantly: MCAD apps are increasingly used in contemporary AEC designs since things these days resemble more to "optimized machines" than "good old brick walls with a roof".
Back to people:
If people starting their career as engineers are stuck/guided solely to the graphical way (like learning to drive a car with an auto-box: missing by 99% of what driving is all about) it could be quite a shock for them to adapt to the brave new world - or the animal farm (depends on the point of view). That said, the parametric way is in an infancy state: just wait a few years to taste first hand what really brave new world means (wait for the next CATIA [in smoke phase at present time] for instance: a bit science fiction by current standards).
If people are already working as members of pro teams in some practice ... well ... it's hard to imagine any benefit of components VS code (especially regarding team work, optimization, alternatives, updates/upgrades, common development language platform - having in mind many other CAD/MCAD apps etc etc etc). For instance ... just consider including that humble SolidWorks (C#) in your arsenal (and a lot of other apps).
On the other hand 99% of the whole parametric thing IS NOT some sort of idea (not a big deal: anyone can have a million ideas) ... it's the data management/handling itself (in our case: DataTrees, what else?). Find ANY pro who could suggest dealing with Trees via components instead of code (masochists excluded).
On the other hand what cryptic means it's a matter of personal view: for instance speaking Mandarin is indeed cryptic (at least to me, although I do some business there) but almost 2B others find that ... quite natural, he he.
Finally and most importantly: sampling some geometry to do some abstract thing and design a real-life building out of them ... well there's a colossal distance in complexity, meaning that theory and reality differ vastly.
But there's always the choice: if you want to chat with a mirror, don't listen to me.
BTW: I use GH as a supplement to Generative Components (slow, bugs, almost dead) and/or as stand alone (good fun, vibrant forum, lot's of people with burning eyes). Using Rhino for AEC BIM oriented purposes is kinda 3rd marriage: triumph of hope VS experience.
BTW: I'll post here soon something that does geodetic domes (using solely thing(s) that piss off people - Mandarin speakers excluded). That something does lines/breps in 3d space.
The only thing that you have to do (in order to get the dollars and the girl) is to do something (like this very old something attached made a million years ago) out of the previous something (I advise NOT to attempt it with "components" - but then again I always admire the brave)
But I read the above post as follows: You believe that geodomes are something highly advanced and complex. Since your are a clever boy, you solved that entirely in C#, using your vast knowledge in trigonometrics and coding. Cheers to that.
See the attached image. Probably not as advanced as your future post, but it's done in 5 minutes and required neither a single line of code nor any mathematical knowledge.
One of the main questions peter has been asking is what's the next step? Now we've got a geodesic dome - but how to fabricate it, how to get to shop drawings, how to control the construction details in a way that can be controlled for production?
So the answer among the lines "you shouldn't do grasshopper and you should never even attempt that" can be valid (but that's also boring).
Well...you know that I rate you as AAA+++ male ... but even for your caliber ... you can't beat the System (as defined by Bentey Systems, AutoDesk and Nemetschek). Even if GH+R could do "complete" AEC things ... the others could be several steps ahead either by virtue or by momentum.
But Hannes (and others - the pissed-off ones, he he) misunderstood my intentions: I'm not here to measure our ego(s), our @$@% nor to dispute/debate for the obvious. I'm not here for the money (that could be ridiculous) the glory (preposterous), or to perform some cheapo show-off (what for?).
I'm here in case that people can distinguish (and are willing to talk and suggest ways/methods/you name it) the difference between up hauling a windsurf sail and attempting a single forward (that's a loop, he he - the double one is another animal).
By that I mean: ways/methods/whatever that could yield a GH/R combo that could seriously be part of the System as above.
Forget geodomes ... get this (reduced by 95%, every 5th floor combo is shown) and think: what we can do for that matter?
Well presenting your personal resume along with your power to chop off heads (as a supreme human being enjoying it) , just to make your point stronger, seems like an ego trip to me and irrelevant to the topic discussed.
ps. If the pissed off description was about me, i can tell you i am not, just trying to humor.
for all the other posts in topics you were answering with c# code, i was just trying to help the original poster, which in most cases is novice so grasshopper already seems cryptic, let alone c# code snippets.
Erm ... I had a bit more pragmatic things in mind (remember: I'm after dollars and the girl, he he) like this one attached (double geodome option = true, MERO option = true, UseMembrane option = false, getTheCash option = YES).
Using: MERO + corrugated galvanised sheets + Foamglas(*) + VMZink/CalZip.
(*) with one s.
I believe you are still missing the main point that Hannes made...
This is not (and never was) a debate about code vs components as you seem to understand it.
The only problem is that you are posting in the wrong place.
99% of the posted questions in the general discussion forum are from novice grasshopper users who have lack of very basic knowledge.
In my opinion, the best response to these posts is providing the simplest (easiest to understand) solution to the problem, plus an explanation of why the definition wasn't working, plus some suggested fields of study.
On the other hand, you provide a very fancy solution, which gets the job done (and usually a bunch of other jobs as well), but there is 0% chance it will be comprehended or further developed by the OP...
This is the typical giving_fish_VS_teaching_how_to_fish debate.
As for the "please ignore me if you enjoy being primitive" argument, I am afraid it is not as simple as that. A post with 3-4 replies (which, in this case, would be 3 subsequent versions of your solution, plus an awkward "ehm, tyvm" from the OP) has a great chance of going unnoticed by anyone who could provide a gh solution...
And finally I have to point out that the right place for coding discussion is just a doorstep away.
a not-pissed-off co-member of this forum
My scope is certainly to help users (otherwise why bother answering any given thread?) but my scope is also to "open" a potential window to another world (Plan B or whatever). What could be the meaning or posting "ready" (kinda) solutions in response to something asked in the code related forum? (that could be rather ridiculous: Greetings code freaks: a user - that you've never heard of - asked this and I did that ... utterly ridiculous).
Now .. if a request comes from a novice either a component based solution or a freaky one ... well ... they have a very limited usage (if any usage at all) on a per se basis: because only time combined with a certain experience could yield the required ability to deal with issues before happening.
On the other hand ...to tell you the truth I believe that's far easier for a novice to get some "basic" programming skills and deal with his/her issues (who are in 99% of cases data management related ones) than to attack them via components.
On the other hand I believe that in the future (not the distant one) ... anyone involved in this ugly business AND not speaking some freaky language he could be rated as class D citizen (brave new world: here we are).
But that's a highly personal opinion (extreme to the max, as usual, he he).
PS: I don't think that the majority of posts here come from novices (yesterday a fellow user asked a very challenging thing: the one with the max rectangle).
are you actually arguing that programming is easier to learn than grasshopper an application developed so that people could program easier?.......
If this is some kind of protest against GH I think you should make a clearer case. Maybe make a new post titled "GH is a total FAIL", or something and we can talk about it. But if not, then I believe you lost it somewhere along the way because, in an urge to make your point, you ended up cancelling GH altogether....
Finally, about future predictions, they are always personal as you say. So here is an interesting video about the future of programming by a guy that David pointed out in another discussion: