rface(test_brep, test_surface, 0.1, curves_list, points_list)
and I get back:
1. Error (BC30311): Value of type 'System.Collections.Generic.List(Of Rhino.Geometry.Curve)' cannot be converted to '1-dimensional array of Rhino.Geometry.Curve'. (line 97)
2. Error (BC30311): Value of type 'System.Collections.Generic.List(Of Rhino.Geometry.Point3d)' cannot be converted to '1-dimensional array of Rhino.Geometry.Point3d'. (line 97)
Could anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks!…
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
me in 19 different pipeline components. Marginally better, but I'll still need to do this operation approx. 80 times...gulp.
Here's a wishlist request for David: expose string inputs in the Geometry Pipeline for Layer and Name. If I had that, I could change one string to swap my whole geometry set! (My layers have names like "B1 red rail", "B1 blue rail" etc., then the next time I'll want "B2 red rail", "B2 blue rail" etc.)
BTW, I'm happy to script something in C# if it will help: maybe I could write something like the Geometry Pipeline that takes a string input for layer name? Hmmm...
…
hreads where Thread I solves object A1 and Thread II solves object A2. As soon as A1 is completed, Thread I can move on to object B1 and as soon as A2 completes, Thread II can move on to object B3 (whichever comes first). When both A1 and A2 are complete, we can spawn a new thread (III) to take care of object B2.
If B2 completes before B3, then Thread III will terminate. If B3 completes before B2, then Thread II terminates. Whichever thread is last will pick up execution of object C3. And so on and so forth.
This sort of threading is actually not guaranteed to help much though, as it is likely that the bottleneck components in the network will still need to be handled by a single thread.
A more efficient solution would be to divvy up the execution per component to multiple threads. If you're trying to compute the Curve Closest Point for 10,000 points and your machine contains 4 cores, then we can assign 2,500 points to the first core, 2,500 points to the second core etc.
This approach will actually work when there's only a few bottleneck components and it also means the order in which components are solved is no longer important.
An even more fine-grained approach to threading would be to make the Curve Closest Point function in the Rhino SDK threaded. There's a lot of looping going on in any given Curve CP computation so the curve could be broken up into loose spans where each span is solved by a different core. Then the partial results get consolidated once all threads finish.
The benefit here is that it would be multi-core for everyone, not just Grasshopper components.
The bad news: Some functions in Rhino are not thread-safe. Meaning that data structures such as NurbsCurves cannot be modified from multiple threads at once as it will compromise their validity. You might well end up with invalid curves and quite possible weird crashes. In very bad cases it might even be that a specific function in our SDK can only be running once, so even if you were to duplicate the curve it would still not work.
Until our SDK is thread-safe there can be no global threading in Grasshopper. I don't know where we're headed with this, but I do know that we've started using some threaded algorithms in the display as of Rhino5, so it seems we're at least getting our feet wet.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Seattle, WA…
Added by David Rutten at 5:47pm on November 17, 2010