Thanks David.  Haven't had too much time to play around with it, but
as soon as I looked at the comments the questions immediately popped
in my head.

1) That makes sense and seams easy enough.  I guess OnObject would be
the second to last resort then...

2) Yep, clean trees are happy trees.

3) Sounds interesting...looking forward to it.

-Damien

On Apr 10, 5:07 pm, David Rutten <[email protected]> wrote:
> Damien,
>
> sorry, no time to test this but...
>
> 1) you should declare generic classes with the nearest overlap type.
> Thus, if you want to add OnNurbsCurve and OnPolylineCurve you should
> make the tree of type OnCurve.
> System.Object is the last-resort type.
>
> 2) yes. You can create whatever kind of tree you want. But note that
> if you create 'naughty' topology (for example missing branches or
> branches that contain both data AND subbranches), your tree might
> cause problems downstream once smarter tree-matching algorithms are in
> place.
>
> 3) I need to redo the type casting feature, the current one is too
> inflexible.
>
> --
> David Rutten
> [email protected]
> Robert McNeel & Associates
>
> On Apr 10, 10:51 pm, damien_alomar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > David,
>
> > I saw that you added path outputs for scripting
> > components...Awesome...A few questions about this.
>
> > 1) Can the Data Tree accept multiple data types? ie. Can it handle
> > both a OnNurbsCurve and an OnPolyLineCurve.  If so, would you have to
> > declare it as a DataTree (of Object)?
>
> > 2) Can the EH_Path be created with whatever nodes you'd like to
> > create? ie. Path = EH_Path (0,1,2)
>
> > 3) This actually showed up a little quicker than I thought, but since
> > its here now I have to ask.  Is there a plan for acknowledging paths
> > from inputs?
>
> > Thanks for adding this as it makes scripting even sweeter
>
> > Best,
> > Damien
>
> > PS. Have a great time at S2F...unfortunately I'm not able to make it :(

Reply via email to