messy data structure

Hi all:

I´ve been working on this proyect, and i had to spend a couple hours in order to arrange my data structure.

I was able to fix it but i think is really really messy.

Could one of you guys show me a cleaner, faster and more elegant way?

So first i had this 2 data structures:

0,0,0

0,0,0,0,0,0

I used a bunch of graft tree components to make both

0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0

Im sure im missing something, i dont think i have to use so many graft tree components

There must be another component that achives this

Finally i used the path mapper since the structure was line this

0,0,0,1,0,0,0,0,0

0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1

A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,T _____A,B,C,E,F,G,H,I,D

Thanks for your help

Regars

Mario

Attachments:

messy data structure.jpg, 443 KB

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Luis Fraguada on June 14, 2012 at 11:35am

Do you not have the option to simplify the paths?

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on June 14, 2012 at 11:42am

I think this is one way.

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on June 14, 2012 at 1:28pm

Hi Michael,

the path mapper operates on placeholder variables. Numbers are just evaluated as numbers. Try using 'A', 'B', 'C', 'D' etc. instead of '0'

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on June 14, 2012 at 1:31pm

yes I know, I just typed this in on a whim that it might work and I thought it did in this situation for adding paths of just 0, did it not? Although, I personally would just use simplify rather than increasing the path count.

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on June 14, 2012 at 11:44am

also flatten the outputs and then graft the input to loft would also get the results for this case. but if you are happy to use a path mapper for one set why not do it for both.

list 1

{A;B;C}(i) --> {i}

list 2

{A;B;C;D;E;F}(i) --> (i)

both of these actions reduces the list down to one branch per item at the highest level.

Permalink Reply by MARIO VERGARA on June 14, 2012 at 2:40pm