nt to multiply the number of items in the list A, so at the end I will end up with the same number of elements in each lists.
e.g. (for branch 1 in list A I want to have two times the same curve, and the same for the branch 2 and so on )
List A (Data with 88 branches)
{0} N=1
{1} N=1
{2} N=1
{3} N=1...
List B (Data with 88 branches)
{0} N=1
{1} N=2
{2} N=2
{3} N=1...
NEW List A (Data with 88 branches)
{0} N=1
{1} N=2
{2} N=2
{3} N=1...
Any suggestions about how to do this?
Thank you,
Martha
…
a working solution with replacing this line of code with:
Dim charList As New List(Of Char)(charArr)
Is this because of a version incompatibility (I'm using Rhino 4.0, and GH 0.8.0062)? Just curious.
Regards,
JJ…
he code within a limited number of turns. I suggest you check 양방하는법 and learn more interesting things about games. The game is not only challenging and fun, but it also helps to improve cognitive skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and pattern recognition. Mastermind has stood the test of time and remains a beloved game for all ages.…
Added by MichaelD0112 at 12:25am on April 10, 2023
f the mesh was self-intersecting everywhere. So instead I used Millipede (isosurface) to get the same undulations, but ignore the complex 'folds', you can see the difference in cross section thickness. I then tessellated it with the inverse pattern of the outer surface.
To make it a single 3d printable mesh, i just deleted a single face on inner and outer skin, then lofted the naked edges. (creating a tiny hole through the model). Therefore creating a single mesh that folds in on itself, not sure if there is a better way of defining the space between two meshes as the solid area...
Full GH (Kangaroo - Meshmachine - Weaverbird - Millipede)
Special thanks to Laurent Delrieu for his interesting offset mesh method that i based my approach on.
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/offset-mesh-problems-with-3d-mesh-with-weaverbird…
Added by Nick Tyrer at 5:25am on December 10, 2015
rees west to 1 degree west). Changing the latitudinal domain from, say, 0:1 (the equator to 1 degree north) to 88:89 (88 degrees north to 89 degrees north), has zero effect on the x,y shape of the topography map generated. However, in reality, the map should be far, far thinner in the latter case, because longitudinal lines get closer together toward the north and south poles. In actuality, the shape should be close to a trapezoid in both cases, but this is probably not a necessary detail for most people producing maps, since, at an urban or smaller scale, the latitudinal lines bounding the north and south of the map will probably not be that significantly different in length. But the maps should at least stretch from close-to-square for a 1 degree x 1 degree map near the equator to an extremely thin rectangle for a 1 degree x 1 degree map near the north pole.
As an example, I'm looking at a location in Sheffield, UK. The relevant SRTM HGT file spans from 53 N to 54 N, and 2 W to 1 W. The length of the map in the north-south direction should be approximately 111 km, as is the case with the topo map generated by Elk (and a near-standard for 1 degree latitude anywhere in the world). The length of the map in the east-west direction, however, should be somewhere in the range of 67 km, since the 2 W and 1 W longitudinal lines are much closer together at this latitude than they are at the equator. Thus the map should be nearly twice as long in the North-South direction as it is wide in the East-West direction.
If this were to be sorted out, I think it would be really nice to then have the SRTM topo map be positioned automatically in relation to the OSM map being brought in. I think it's good that the OSM map is positioned at 0,0, rather than it's world coordinates, but maybe the SRTM topo map could be aligned with it based on the latitude and longitude domains we input to the SRTM grasshopper module.…
the map? For example in one list I want curves 5, 20, 21, 22, 23, 60. In another I want curves 1, 37, 40. In another maybe 70-80. And in the last, all curves that aren't specified in those three lists. Is there a way to partition the lists as such?…