algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Grasshopper 0.9.0055 is available for downloadThis release fixes a few annoying bugs in 0.9.0054.

If you're updating to 0.9.0054 from 0.9.0014 or older, please read these release notes as they contain some important information. "Important information" incidentally is bold and red, hard to miss.

New since 0.9.0054:

  • Added Remove All to the Galapagos input menu.

  • Added SetSliderValue() method to the RhinoScript interface.

  • Added SetSliderRangeAndValue() method to the RhinoScript interface.

  • Galapagos Object did not display implied slider nicknames in the disconnect menu, this is fixed.

  • AutoSave did not work, this is fixed.

  • Tab in the Panel Editor Window would not actually insert a TAB character, this is fixed.

  • Saving a new document would not update window title, this is fixed.

  • Zoom factors set from the toolbar would not be saved, this is fixed.

  • Some VisualARQ components would not load due to SDK breaks, these have been fixed.




David Rutten

Poprad, Slovakia

Views: 4544

Replies to This Discussion

The main reason I use False is for [Shift List] S = -1 in order to get rid of the last Item other than that it doesn't crop up  

If you want to get rid of the last item doesn't it make more sense to use the Cull Index component?

With the new default you just have to input -1 as well.

interesting, never used negative shift values, typically i revers the input list, shift, then  reverse output list

Actually yes, and I often use it to shift entire branches too.
But i'm working on a peculiar geometry..

Me as well. 9 times out of 10 I am stripping off the end branches. Is there a more canonical way to do this?

I almost always use wrap=true index=-1 to get the last item. The change was requested by people who do the same I think.

There would be a more canonical way of doing it, basically I could keep a record of the N most recent values and pick a default that was the majority amongst those.

That would be both customizable without adding any nasty preferences UI. It would however make it somewhat unpredictable.


David Rutten

Poprad, Slovakia

I think this would be confusing, not knowing the default when sharing definitions, screenshots and so on.

I would leave true as default (well, if I got my way the warp inputs would be removed altogether) and to strip off the end values use something like cull index, split list, sub-list, etc.


The replace items component still has the default as false.

also, split list component doesn't support wrapping.

I admit logic wants true to be the default... 

And I agree an unpredictable result will not be fun, so it's easier to get used to the new default!

you could consider making pop and unshift fxs that do the traditional array operations...

Incidentally, for last item I've always used List Item with default index set to 0 and  a reverse list modifier on the list input.  Super quick, and easy to explain to beginners.

I use T for several operations, but the majority is F for me as well.  The topology of things that I work with is rarely periodic.  Curtain walls, structural grids, test grids, analysis vectos, modules, etc, they tend to be arrayed in groups with finite beginnings and endings.  That makes wrapping very rare.  

I think conforming to the use case for finding the last number in a list is too narrowly defining the use of that component, especially when the simple task is easily accomplished in another rational and efficient way...

Reversing a list consumes resources. If you just want to retrieve the last item using index -1 is more efficient.


When you say you use false the majority of times, you mean that in the majority of the cases you use a component with a wrapping input if you set it as true it will fail?

100% of the times I use wrap true (or it doesn't matter) so default as true wins by 0.1% :P






  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2020   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service