pen Brep"; I didn't know it worked on flat surfaces. And I think it's only fair to include in your benchmark the considerable time 'SUnion' takes in this example: 21.9 seconds for 121 rings and likely much more with 400 or 1,000+ rings.
Then I noticed the pattern doesn't match. Checked the circles and they are the same. The distance between them, however, is different: 7 instead of 6. When I change that value to 6, the Python fails badly. All the holes and gaps are gone, which destroys the pattern:
I can't do the "two phase" approach on an 11 X 11 grid, but I can do 6 X 6 and 2 X 2 to get a 12 X 12 grid (40 'SUnion' operations) in 28 seconds total. That beats your benchmark of ~37 seconds for an 11 X 11 grid, if you include the 'SUnion' in your code.
…
29 points vs. 28 points for the 'Base Crv' - not sure what's up with that?
Move the slider in the 'Adjust Seam' group to see parametric design in action!
And just FYI, there are only 12 discontinuity points in the 'Step Crv' so setting the 'Divide Curve' 'Count' slider to 12 looks pretty good to me, except for that extra point.…
Added by Joseph Oster at 12:26pm on January 10, 2016
error message when GH starts loading (almost the last stage of loading).
I un-installed and re-installed it, but still the same error. When I checked the plug-ins in the options, it seems that it is loading the right one (from the file path), but I noticed when GH starts loading, it is loading GH version Sep 28, 2012.
Any idea how I can get around this problem?
thanks
…
ay be loading it from Rhino 4, but even when I un-installed GH for Rhino 4, GH rhino 5 still loading that version. The strange thing is that when I check Tools-options-plug ins, GH -properties it shows the right file name and path of GrasshopperPlugIn.rhp, and the right registry path too that is in Rhino 5 Plug ins. So why on earth it is loading that previous mysterious copy?, and where it can be located?
Any steps I need to follow that may solve the problem?…
Added by Zayad Motlib at 12:02am on March 11, 2013
h the solution to use domain with range, but I don't think it's optimized. I'm sure there is a simple way to archive it.
See screenshot below.
Regards,
David…