i found some use cases where clicking subobjects would be meaniful… i wanted to click faces of concrete solid block which are formworked and then write that m2 info as an attribute. list iteming deconstructed brep was not a good way. if referenced subobjects kept their info about parent many possibilities would open.
You are literally commenting in the Group called Grasshopper 2 , Just click the Grasshopper 2 tag top of this post.
Well, as for me I have used GH mostly for processing Meshes, not as much experience from Deconstructing Breps etc. Except for some C# components which I code myself, but then I had all the freedom of RhinoCommon, which of course allows to do more or less whatever you want. That’s not for all users though, so hopefully there will be better support in GH2 for subobjects (and parents).
Yh i have been trying to find out more about it but can’t find a straight forward summary of what it is. As I’ve gathered it’s a newer version of grasshopper without a release date that has already been in development for a few years. Is that correct?
Was there ever any further movement on this article?
Sorry @tim052, not yet. I remember seeing that David Rutten posted (cannot easily refind it) that GH2 would be released soon. So I figured it wasn’t necessary.
I guess that was not soon but soon™
It might have been this comment on his YouTube channel:
which is probably also the reason why i have not seen him since basically forever in the forum.
I put together an edited version of my correspondance with David about GH2 in this Medium Article. Just Published!
Unfortunately I don’t have access to any visuals, other than David’s YouTube channel. But the details are interesting nonetheless. It is an edited copy of our email exchange.
It is a quickly written article, short at 6 min. compared to the earlier article Killer Product – A Rhino 3D Product Analysis.
I am very sorry to have waited 1 full year for this… and likely it’ll be released soon. But since nobody knows, I thought it’s better to talk about it sooner rather than later!
@Dani_Abalde - I didn’t remove anything important. He complained about GH1 mathematical functionality, that it was too limited.
This part about GH2 not working with existing plugins developed for GH1 sounds devastating, not only because we develop such tools for GH1 :), but also because as a normal user I really rarely end up with using only default components. Obviously it’s hard to say anything right now, but I hope it won’t end up like Python2->3 transition, where it took a decade to move such things there.
Funny enough - that was my first response too. But… in true McNeel fashion, I suspect that they will find a solution, however temporary or hack-ish. This is my hunch.
I think that as a community of users, we can discuss with McNeel how to solve this, maybe even help in the solution finding. I think a key thing (also I told David) was how to motivate the transition and code refactoring.
I worry for teams like Ladybug --a core library with a lot of code and features-- that would probably benefit immensely from GH2.
A lot of the cases for running GH1 components in GH2 can be solved with Hops. The hops component has a way of taking a single GH1 component and running it in grasshopper 1.
The idea would be to integrate some of this hops technology into GH2 for executing GH1 components.
a lot of the advancements and improvements for GH2 sound really exciting to me. imo the development should not be hold back just to ensure GH1 plugin compatibility. probably the groundwork for the next decade of GH. sure there will always be some people complaining but don’t let this distract you @DavidRutten. I think grasshopper is on a bold path, keep going and good luck.
I’m just a bit worried about the wellbeing of the GH developer. is @DavidRutten really the only person working on GH? to me this sound like a huge task for just one person. would totally understand if he would sometimes just not have the time/patience to also be present here in the forum.
had mentioned this some time ago already:
imo mcneel needs to hire more talent in order to keep up with the development of rhino. just the time alone answering all the questions here in the forum is probably taking a huge part of the devs time. would absolutely pay more for rhino.
after GH2 is done, wouldn’t it be nice if @DavidRutten dedicated his UI/UX skills to completely redoing the rhino UI - PLEASE!?
There are other devs contributing to GH and eventually GH2; myself included.
ok, that sounds good.
wait, contributing may not be enough. I hope there will eventually be more than just him taking care of the core development. I’m no dev, I might misunderstand this but my feeling is that a few more devs contributing isn’t enough. basically all I want to say is that the userbase of rhino and gh grows, so do the capabilities of the program and so should the dev team.
Thank you for publishing this!
That is big news. This has been one of the biggest limitations of Grasshopper in my opinion. Really excited to see where David and the team are going to take it with 2.0
Thanks for the article! I think lady bird is decently platform agnostic as it’s been ported to blender. Most plugins that use a lot of external dlls should be be able to make the jump from GH1 to GH2 with less effort as you will hopefully only have to swap at the translation layer between grasshopper and core code base.