the one-but-last list [4]. After running out of the n- items avalaible it should continue with the second item of list 0 and so on for all items on all the lists.
Intput, six lists of 30 items each
[0] (n=30)
[1] (n=30)
[2] (n=30)
[3] (n=30)
[4] (n=30)
[5] (n=30)
Output, 18 lists of 10 items each
[0],i=0;[5],i=4; [4],i=7;...
[0],i=1;[5],i=5; [4],i=8;...
...
[5],i=1;[4],i=5; [3],i=0;...
I thought perhaps the weave component or the relative tree item component but didn't manage to figure out how to compose the mask. I couldn't find much on how to use these. I guess it should wrap the lists, but not the items.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.…
Added by Thorsten Lang at 2:27am on January 24, 2011
Hi,
I want to divide curve with distance between points so it will be like this:
1--2---3----4-----5------6-------7-----, ...
with values in range 1 to 50, must be simple but im stuck..
tnx
For example.
If you have two lists of points.
List A List B
{0;0;0}(0) {0;0}(0)
{0;0;1}(0) {0;1}(0)
{0;2}(0)
{0;3}(0)
{0;4}(0)
And you want to merge the two lists so that the two points in list A are the end points.
Merge Lists Results:
{0;0}(0)
{0;0;0}(0)
{0;0;1}(0)
{0;1}(0)
{0;2}(0)
{0;3}(0)
{0;4}(0)
Because of their path structures the order is wrong from a simple merge so Flattening now is out of the question.
Path Mapper
{A;B} --> {A;B+1}
{A;B;C} --> {A;C*6}
---------------------
Results:
{0;0} --> {0;0+1} = {0;1}
{0;1} --> {0;1+1} = {0;2}
{0;2} --> {0;2+1} = {0;3}
{0;3} --> {0;3+1} = {0;4}
{0;4} --> {0;4+1} = {0;5}
{0;0;0} --> {0;0*6} = {0;0}
{0;0;1} --> {0;1*6} = {0;6}
Now with the Path Structures similar when they are re-ordered the results will have the two points of list A as the end points.
Question 2
why did the curve-line intersection lose the path structure? Both trees had 38 branches.
Both trees had 38 Paths but Tree A had more Items, 147 compared to 38 in Tree B.
So you get this happening:
{0;0;0;0;0;0}(0) compared to {0;0;0;0}(0) results: Null {0;0;0;0;0;0}(0)
Base result paths on longest
{0;0;1;0;0;0}(0) compared to {0;0;0;1}(0) results: Null {0;0;1;0;0;0}(0)
{0;0;2;0;0;0}(0) compared to {0;0;0;2}(0) results: Yes {0;0;2;0;0;0;0}(0)
Add a branch to contain result
{0;0;3;0;0;0}(0) compared to {0;0;0;3}(0) results: Yes {0;0;3;0;0;0;0}(0)
{0;0;3;0;0;0}(1) compared to {0;0;0;3}(0) results: No {0;0;3;0;0;0;1}(0)
{0;0;4;0;0;0}(0) compared to {0;0;0;4}(0) results: Yes {0;0;4;0;0;0;0}(0)
{0;0;4;0;0;0}(1) compared to {0;0;0;4}(0) results: Yes {0;0;4;0;0;0;1}(0)
{0;0;5;0;0;0}(0) compared to {0;0;0;5}(0) results: Yes {0;0;5;0;0;0;0}(0)
{0;0;5;0;0;0}(1) compared to {0;0;0;5}(0) results: Yes {0;0;5;0;0;0;1}(0)
{0;0;5;0;0;0}(2) compared to {0;0;0;5}(0) results: Yes {0;0;5;0;0;0;2}(0)
...... etc
…
cture, Rhino treats them as a single flat list. For example a surface can have 10 rows and 6 columns of control-points, resulting in a list of 60 points.
But 10 times 6 isn't the only way to get to 60. If you want to make a surface out of a list of 60 points, you'll also have to tell Rhino how those 60 points should be interpreted in terms of a grid. It could be 2*30, 3*20, 4*15, 5*12, 6*10, and all of the aforementioned products the other way around.
Sometimes there's only one way for a number of points to fit into a rectangular grid. For example if you provide 49 points, then 7*7 is the only way to make it work, but these cases are rare so we always demand you give us all the information required to actually make a rectangular grid of control-points from a linear collection.
As for "Why is it, sometimes we need to attach additional value into it?", this is usually because when you divide a domain or a curve into N segments, you end up with N+1 points. For example take the domain {0 to 5}, and divide it into 5 equal subdomains. You end up with {0 to 1}, {1 to 2}, {2 to 3}, {3 to 4} and {4 to 5}. However there are six numbers that mark the transitions between these domains 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. This is why you often have to add 1 to the UCount, because the number that controls the UCount often results in N+1 actual points.…
Added by David Rutten at 8:30am on December 25, 2014