Isn't it a bit illogical that Cull Pattern removes the negative ones?

Shouldn’t the Cull Pattern remove the True ones, rather than False ones?
Cull has two meanings in English, one is killing(removing) and the other is selecting. As an English learner, it confused me quite a time when it does the former and when it does the latter.

I mean when I choose Cull Pattern I like to remove something from a list, so naturally, I will give the ones I intended the positive value, right?

1 Like

Yes, I agree that this is inconsistent. Also the naming is sometimes a bit odd. But as always you should not forget that GH1 is old and a broadly-used software. Just imagine the logic would now be replaced. Thousands of users upgrade Rhino/GH and suddenly many scripts fail, or even worse, they produce none-sense. 10 years ago, changing this would have made sense. But at this point…


@Quan_Li is correct that the use of “cull” in English can be inconsistent. The typical use I see is cull means selecting the items to be discarded, which is frequently stated as removing the items which do not pass a test.

Yep I’m pretty worried about this when the new version of Grasshopper is released, we use alot of Grasshopper files internally.

Until you open GH 2 :broken_heart:

I guess no ‘logic’ is changed but the language and components have/will - yay, time to spend half a decade relearning :stuck_out_tongue: