Quickly finding groups/comps in an Entity Collection?

TIG

Write a def that iterates back on itself - something like this [untried]...


def miner(ents)
  ents.to_a.each{|e|
    if e.class==Sketchup;;Group
      miner(e.entities)
      e.explode
    elsif e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
      igroup=e.parent.entities.add_group(e)
      e.explode
      miner(igroup.entities)
      igroup.explode
    end#if
  }#end each
end#def
### usage...
miner(my_entities)

Chris Fullmer

Looks good TIG. That code is significantly more compact than my code I am running. I need to spend some time and do some time tests on these various methods. On certain models I had felt that the process of finding internal groups and exploding them was the main thing slowing this script (shape bender) down. But now in my tests, I have not found a model that seems to freeze up on searching for explodeables. So now I'm sure it was such a HUGE problem as I thought it was. I did go throuh and clean out all my old typename == "Group" type comparisons for faster .class == Sketchup::Group. That alone made the script take 25% less time (from 10 seconds down to 7.5 for example). So that was a good change.

Thanks Thom and TIG for the ideas. I'll respond here once I get around to doing some more time tests on this internal exploding business.

Chris

thomthom

@chris fullmer said:

I did go throuh and clean out all my old typename == "Group" type comparisons for faster .class == Sketchup::Group.

Yes - String comparisons are slooow!

thomthom

@tig said:


>     elsif e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
>       igroup=e.parent.entities.add_group(e)
>       e.explode
>       miner(igroup.entities)
>       igroup.explode
>     end#if
>

Why are you grouping the component and exploding both of them?

TIG

I grouped the instance so that I could then explode it keeping its entities in the group so I can find them easily - I can then look at those for further 'mining'... Once I have processed all of its entities back to raw geometry I can explode that 'igroup' group - Chris wants everything inside the 'entities set' exploded - we can't explode the definition's entities as it would affect other instances too so I explode the instance but keep its newly created entities inside that group for easier 'use'...

Jim

If I understand what you want to do, you are making it harder than it is.

Search the tree and build a list of things to explode.
Then go through the list and explode them.


def traverse_entities(entities, list)
    entities.each do |entity|
        if entity.class == Sketchup;;Group
            traverse_entities(entity.entities, list)
            list.push(entity)
        elsif enitity.class == Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
            traverse_entities(entity.definition.entities, list)
            list.push(entity)
        end
    end
end

def explode_selected
    list = []
    traverse_entities(Sketchup.active_model.selection, list)
    list.each { |entity| entity.explode }
end

I think TIG's would work like this if you don't need a list or general purpose traversal; which is essentially the same thing but more specialized.


    def exploder(ents)
      ents.to_a.each{|e|
        if e.class==Sketchup;;Group
          exploder(e.entities)
          e.explode
        elsif e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
          exploder(e.definition.entities)
          e.explode
        end
      }
    end
    ### usage...
    exploder(my_entities)

The tendency is to perform the explode before the recursion. Go ahead and do the recursion first, and defer the explode until after the recursion returns.

The result is that the most deeply nested objects get exploded first, and then works up the hierarchy. The last object exploded is then the first object found.

cjthompson

@jim said:

If I understand what you want to do, you are making it harder than it is.
The result is that the most deeply nested objects get exploded first, and then works up the hierarchy. The last object exploded is then the first object found.

wouldn't you want to explode top > down instead of bottom > up? that way, you don't explode definitions of instances in other Entities.

or was Chris thinking of exploding the whole model?

TIG

My version was to explode only groups and instances within a set of entities [which I understood to be the aim] and any groups/instances found within them - definition contents shouldn't change?]. To avoid confusing arrays of things to explode I think it's best to work from the lowest level up and explode these first, isn't it ?

cjthompson

@tig said:

My version was to explode only groups and instances within a set of entities [which I understood to be the aim] and any groups/instances found within them - definition contents shouldn't change?].

Since you are exploding bottom to top, the top level definitions will change before they are exploded.

here is a method that will explode them top to bottom:


def miner(ents)
	ents.each{|e|
		if e.class==Sketchup;;Group
			miner(e.explode)
		elsif e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
			miner(e.explode)
		end#if
		}#end each
end#def

EDIT: I just realized that's what the group is for.

Jim

@jim said:

If I understand what you want to do,

Clearly, I do not.

Chris Fullmer

Hehe, great thread. Yes, I want to explode everything inside a component. IT is possible that it might have componeonts inside it, that are used elsewhere and they should not have all their internals exploded. So I think if you work from deepest level to uppermost level, you have to do some trickery to not explode the stuff that exists in other instances outside mine.

I would think more Jim and Chris on this and explode before recursing. And ther is no double exploding of any component. That way the component is exploded and there is no chance of affecting its siblings outside in the rest of the model.

All in all, plenty of giid feedback and SIGNIFICANTLY simpler code than my silly piece I put togther

Chris

Jim

@cjthompson said:

Since you are exploding bottom to top, the top level definitions will change before they are exploded.

here is a method that will explode them top to bottom:

Yes, that's logical. It explodes Groups and Instances but does not decimate Definitions like I did. Thanks.

def miner(ents)
    ents.each do |e|
       if e.class==Sketchup;;Group or e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
           miner(e.explode) 
       end
    end
end

MartinRinehart

Is it guaranteed that groups/instances are a tree structure?

One cycle (A is a member of B; B is, directly or indirectly, a member of A) turns a recursive function into an infinite loop.

thomthom

@martinrinehart said:

Is it guaranteed that groups/instances are a tree structure?

One cycle (A is a member of B; B is, directly or indirectly, a member of A) turns a recursive function into an infinite loop.

No - SU does not allow that.

cjthompson

this thread reminds me of this:
http://refactormycode.com/codes/2-ruby-simple-loop
with each consecutive code sample improving on the last

although the only improvement I could possibly add might be:


def miner(ents)
    for e in ents
       if e.class==Sketchup;;Group or e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
           miner(e.explode) 
       end
    end
end

TIG

Or to compact it as much as I can see, into a one-liner


def xis(a);a.each{|e|xis(e.explode)if e.class==(Sketchup;;Group||Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)};end

"xis" == e Xplode Instance S
Usage: xis(entities)

PS: a shorter way to do their puts 1 to 10 is this
n=0;p n+=1while n<10

thomthom

I take a few extra lines for readability any day.

Jim

@thomthom said:

I take a few extra lines for readability any day.

True, but "squish-the-code" is a fun exercise and I often learn something new.


def xis(a);a.map{|e|xis(e.explode)if e.respond_to?('move!')};end

(assuming no one has added move! to any of the built-in classes!)