"if you're extremely smart and educated :D" = "if you're *NOT* extremely smart and educated :D" lol Cheers
On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 12:15 AM, pedro santos <probi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Matt > I'm guessing what triggered your response was the word "slow". Notice that > I was mentioning me as an instruction creator being slower with code to get > to what I wanted not execution performance wise as nodes give me that super > power: Do more mistakes faster which is helpful to path-find an algorithm > if you're extremely smart and educated :D. It also didn't help the briefing > was not crystal clear to me from the start so I invested time on several > fronts, that was quite rich experience even though time was wasted. But > next time I need them, I'll rename that to "investment" :) > > But at the moment the goals are clear and I nailed them with all the > inputs I received here too, so I'm thankful. > https://gfycat.com/FearfulRemorsefulAnaconda > > Like I said, I got that C++ course and will dive into it, but at the > moment I would not have produced anything meaningful for the task. > > Thanks again! > > Pedro > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Matt Lind <speye...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Um....I don't think your assessment is correct. >> >> The SDK is single threaded, but in this context ICE is too. Past tests >> have >> shown that ICE performs ~30% slower than the SDK in single threaded tasks >> because of the additional overhead with nodes/tree evaluation. If you can >> parallelize the task, then the game changes, but with all the issues >> you've >> run into, that's not likely to happen. >> >> You don't have to write the operator in C++. Scripted operator will also >> work and be less hassle. In fact, you could've been done with it already. >> If you have to deliver, the amount of time it takes to find the ICE >> workaround (and a reliable one) will exceed the amount of time it would've >> taken to write the operator using the standard SDK. >> >> do what you want. >> >> >> Matt >> >> >> >> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:48:13 +0100 >> From: pedro santos <probi...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: Distribute between knots? Know the percentage position of >> a knot? >> To: Softimage Mailing List <softimage@listproc.autodesk.com> >> >> Will do Matt, one day. Got that C++ plus course I referenced. Seems great. >> But now I have to deliver something x) I apologize if this is cringy for >> you!! Yes the bits you talk about are the most annoying for me, building >> the algorithms in straight up code is already a bit slower but the SDK >> part >> is going beyong solving the problem at hand many times, and these are >> usually handled for you with node. Hail nodes! :D I'll meet that C++ >> bipolar madame soon :) >> >> Was able to re-purpose "Curve Distance to Curve U" from Dual Curve Deform >> by Antton Tapani, to make my dual curve conform along curve length. >> >> Thanks everyone (!) for the inputs, they were helpful as what was >> requested >> of me kept updating! Here's the result so far: >> https://app.box.com/s/tcvzwph4b0j2jf48yqcuscg08lt17gtq >> >> Cheers >> Pedro >> >> ------ >> Softimage Mailing List. >> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com >> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >> > > > > -- > > > > *------------------------------[image: > http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/probiner-sig.gif]Pedro > Alpiarça dos Santos >> http://probiner.xyz/ <http://probiner.xyz/> > <http://probiner.x10.mx/>* > -- *------------------------------[image: http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/probiner-sig.gif]Pedro Alpiarça dos Santos >> http://probiner.xyz/ <http://probiner.xyz/> <http://probiner.x10.mx/>*
------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
![http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/probiner-sig.gif]Pedro](http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/probiner-sig.gif]Pedro){kind=link}