IF I can write a pseudo code for a model, is it still difficult to find all the GH commands to finish the task?
Sorry but yours is a totally generic question.
Do you have experience:
in rhino (or another surface modeling CAD)?
in grasshopper (or another programming language)?
âDifficultâ is completely subjective.
One you have some experience, you start to fear nothing. But if you are a novice, expect yourself learning by doing a lot of mistakes. Thatâs life.
GH is not a cheat tool to bypass a learning curve.
Can you give more background around your question?
1 Like
Youâd be amazed how some operations that seem obvious in pseudo-code may require tenths of components in Grasshopper. But I guess knowing how to think âparametricallyâ will still be helpful.
As @maje90 says, you need to be a bit more specific about your goal.
Potentially. There is no facility to search for components by function so you are dependent upon your knowledge of the components and their organization. The more familiar you are, the easier it will become. The basic functionality in grasshopper per se is extensive, but there is far more, often specialised, functionality dispersed across a large number of third party plugins. These may overlap, become unsupported or superseded, or seem impenetrable if you are not âin the knowâ.
The mantra for Grasshopper is âlearn by doingâ, backed up by tapping the knowledge of fellow practitioners on this forum, who can be remarkably generous with their time.
All of which said, if you find writing pseudo-code helps you organise your requirements and structure the development process then go for it. For anything non-trivial you will be better off as a result.
Regards
Jeremy
I agree, you need to learn the GH vocabulary to be able to use it. Some kind of semantic searcher would be great.
However you can add aliases per component to use your own names, via right click on the component icon.
Also instead of trying to memorise component names, you can learn how components are grouped in the component ribbon, by category (Params, Curve, Surface, Interseccion, TransformâŚ), subcategories and subsections. So for example if you want to extract some surface data, you know your component will be at Surface tab, Analysis panel.
Thank you guys for the wonderful sharing and encouragement.
I am thinking of developing my pseudo code like the attached, can I do it locally inside GH?
Or need to goto Miro?
Sorry, but what is the benefit of this? Do you want to create the same shape in a different tool? If so, you cannot guarantee that tool A yields the same output as tool B. I see absolutely no point for this. What if tool B misses one implementation? Btw, the same is true for any Pseudocode. This is absolutely off any practical relevance, and rather academic subject if you ask me. Pseudocode follows the purpose that any person should read logic, but its a own language and often very close to a particular language. Pseudocode looks often like Java or like Python which makes it biased anyways.
1 Like
We use miro a lot to map out the inputs and outputs of a process and identify intermediate sub processes.
This is a critical communication tool for computational design thinking. Itâs software agnostic and high level. I ask engineers to create or elaborate on flow diagrams to understand whatâs involved. Often a ânodeâ in miro represents what will become a script or cluster or type of data in grasshopper
I never go to the level of detail of reoresenting actual functions or nodes. In fact I often diagram processes that are substantially human centered or hybrid between various systems such as gh or code or human or physical.
I highly recommend this as a starting point when beginning a new script. This is especially important when collaborating with others regardless of their experience or exposure to grasshopper. I use this as a tool to elicit what is implicit or not contained within a script. The context and additional assumptions about inputs etc.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I use Miro as well.
Tom,
I read your earlier message you posted several years ago. You said anyone could understand any code if the documentation is complete and clear. Thanks for mentioning this. This encourages me alot.
I experimented quite a few components and got better understanding regarding what they can do without misleading by their componentâs names.