Path mapper problem

Hello all,

I have a problem, which didnt look like a problem until I tried to solve it.

I have a set of lines which i want to divide in a certain dash pattern which will be different for each line but using same elements.

i.e. lets say that number 0.5 0.3 0.8 1.2 should be the elements that i would like to be shuffled (no matter if the gap of line are one of these numbers)

I tried having each line as one branch and then the same number of branches with dash-patterns... doesent work

What I am doing wrong?

Attachments:

mapper.png, 542 KB
dashed.gh, 7 KB

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 15, 2012 at 8:05am

I would hazard a guess that this is the same bug I reported to David in this thread here. As you can see from his reply he seems to have fixed it but it won't be available until he is brave enough to release the next version (0.9.0001)

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 15, 2012 at 8:14am

Here's a work around in the mean time, but you will probably have to play around with the numbers of Duplicates to grouping.

Attachments:

dashed_Workaround.gh, 8 KB

Permalink Reply by JaHko on March 15, 2012 at 8:24am

Thank you for the effort!

Let me try to understand what you did...

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 15, 2012 at 9:08am

In the internal build (0.9.0001) if I switch off Cross Reference on the Dash component, I get a result similar to Danny's image below.

However, it doesn't look correct with Cross Reference enabled at all. Since the [C] input is grafted and the [Pt] input is a list, I'd expect it to not make any difference whether the mapping is Shortest List, Longest List or Cross Reference. Looks like I need to do some more digging.

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 15, 2012 at 9:28am

My bad, I didn't spot the cross Reference. If you switch it to longest or shortest list its fine.

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 15, 2012 at 9:32am

Maybe something like this can be put in place as Cross Reference always catches me out. Ever since data trees came along it seems to be redundant in my workflow.

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 15, 2012 at 9:44am

The whole premise of Data List Matching is outdated. It was designed before Data Trees came onto the scene and it doesn't scale well as you noted. Maybe it's best to remove it entirely. Or if we do keep an improved version of it, I agree it needs to be visible directly which version is used, just like the state tags for Reparameterization, Expressions etc.

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

RSS