Hi,
Short question about interface/ Canvas.
When we click ALT on grasshopper Canvas, we can extend canvas to left/right, up/down.
but is it possible to pull/exaction/retract the canvas (the opposite of the extend)?
I’m not talking about undo.
For example: Now if we want to bring components closer we have to select all these components and move it, but I mean to bring closer all canvas.
(Sory for my English)
Thanks
Does anyone even agree with me that such a function would be useful
or Is it only me who thinks so? 
I totally agree that it would be, indeed, useful.
A lot of other similar posts, like this one i did recently:
https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/wish-drag-rhino-geometries-into-canvas-as-referenced-params/99390
Or generally others with “wish”:
https://discourse.mcneel.com/search?q=wish%20category%3A2
The hope is that David find some time in future to add them, IF it is worth.
Grasshopper 2 is under development and many small features can be already planned and/or the structure overall will change so a current idea for GH1 doesn’t “fit” in GH2 … maybe.
But probably the focus on the development is mainly on the reliability of the functionalities instead of the “extras”.
If i would be asked what i prefer between a more solid mesh slicing/intersecting math or a dozens of extra functions (for ui and such) , i would prefer the mesh thing.
Like, on your car would you prefer to add air conditioning or a more powerful engine?
There is the “serengeti” tag in this forum, which is more related about the development of rhino and grasshopper.
I don’t remember often to visit that category, but you might find it interesting and have a more detailed info about the overall situation.
This is all from just my personal and partial view of the situation, i can be wrong in many aspects.
well, I‘m personally not a big fan of all this „workflow“ improvements. How many components do you place a day? I believe components should provide more functionality per component instead. The point of this is to prevent definitions getting bigger and bigger, which is the root of evil. Its funny because I know people having done definitions with a couple of thousand components, which I have reduced down to 30 to 50 with a little bit of scripting, even working more reliable. Most components are even used to map data correctly and not executing actual functionality. Improvements in this direction is much more required if you ask me.
Thank You very much Riccardo for answer.
If this is the choice between this and this… then of course I prefer a more powerful engine.
I just didn’t understand what “serengeti” category is about, thanks for the clarification.
I also agree with You that is better increase functionality.
I only gave such an idea.
I have a question for You.
What did your path look like?
Were you a C#/Python programmer first, who started working with grasshopper?
Or for example, are you an architect who became interested in grasshopper and first got to know the components, and then you started learning programming?
No, the idea is not bad at all, quite useful. Actually I wasn‘t saying this clearly. Seems like @gankeyu already solved it.
I‘ve started programming before using Grasshopper using various Basic dialects. But I never did software development before, so my programming skills were very „basic“. Basically just knowing conditions, loops ,variables and function calls. Enough for little scripting (Solidworks->Vb) or 2d game building (BlitzBasic)
When starting with Grasshopper I didn‘t do much scripting either. When I started my first job, I immediately began to advance in C#, C and later Python. Now I‘m not doing any GH professionally anymore, but pure Software development… I‘ve studied LS Architecture and Mechanical Engineering but never worked in both fields other then student labour. After my master thesis I directly went from Product Design(interior and exterior car design) to Software engineering (Powertrain engineering) Completely off the path… I wouldn’t recommend to copy this way, because its full of hard resistance and prejudgements 
But learning coding for scripting purposes is not difficult. Its a great thing to do if you want to learn on a daily basis. But without this mindset its rather frustrating…
You have a great experience. 
I do think that, eventually, coding will become an essential skill just like maths. Your other knowledge and how it interacts with computational thinking are what matters.
Looks a bit weird.