sketchucation logo sketchucation
    • Login
    ℹ️ Licensed Extensions | FredoBatch, ElevationProfile, FredoSketch, LayOps, MatSim and Pic2Shape will require license from Sept 1st More Info

    Retrieving parent definition

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Developers' Forum
    13 Posts 5 Posters 1.3k Views 5 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Chris FullmerC Offline
      Chris Fullmer
      last edited by

      Or maybe this is an instance where simply finding all component instances inside the model space is a good way to go. Use the cool grep feature:

      outer_instances = Sketchup.active_model.active_entities.grep(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance))
      

      Lately you've been tan, suspicious for the winter.
      All my Plugins I've written

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Dan RathbunD Offline
        Dan Rathbun
        last edited by

        You would test the definitions' entities collections to see if it contains any instances.

        dl = Sketchup.active_model.definitions() pars = dl.reject {|d| d.entities.grep(Sketchup::ComponentInstance).empty? }

        I'm not here much anymore.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • TIGT Offline
          TIG Moderator
          last edited by

          model=Sketchup.active_model
          definitions_containing_instances = []
          model.definitions.each{|d|
            next if d.group? || d.image? ### for compos only
            d.entities.each{|e|
              if e.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)
                definitions_containing_instances << d
                break
              end
            }
          }
          

          This code makes an array named ' definitions_containing_instances', which contains only component-definitions that contain another component-instance.
          Groups and Images are ignored.
          It will always contain any component-definition that matches this simple rule... so an instance of defn A inside defn B adds def B to the list, AND and instance of defn C inside defn A also adds defn A to the list...
          It you only want one level of nested to return positive, then you you can check for the defn having an instance with a parent that is not the model and the skip it...

          model=Sketchup.active_model
          definitions_containing_instances = []
          model.definitions.each{|d|
            next if d.group? || d.image? ### for compos only
            nested=false
            d.instances.each{|i|
              if i.parent != model
                nested=true
                break
              end
            }
            next if nested
            d.entities.each{|e|
              if e.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)
                definitions_containing_instances << d
                break
              end
            }
          }
          

          TIG

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • F Offline
            Frankn
            last edited by

            Thanks for taking the time to reply,

            @Chris, I've never heard of grep before, which isn't all that surprising since I'm still very much a newbie to all this. I'll have to look into it and see how helpful it can be in certain instances. I tried to run your code but it only returns instances... I'm thinking there's something you might of left out which is cool it'll give me something to play with and see if I can figure it out on my own which is how I seem to learn the best. πŸ˜‰

            @Dan, thanks for the simple solution which works great! Again, you're using grep which I have no clue of what it does but this line of code I'm sure will be helpful in understanding it.

            @Tig, Thanks for the more detailed code, it works just as desribed and does exactly what I need it to do. I'll study the code later on to try and fully understand what's going on there. One question regarding your code, any reason or advantage to using << instead of .push()?

            It's always interesting to see that there are many ways to accomplish the same task. Thanks for your time guys.

            One suggestion if I may do so, maybe this should be added to the code snippets thread? Asking is always my last resort so I'm getting pretty good at searching for answers and I couldn't for the life of me find anything pertaining to this. 😳

            Frank

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • TIGT Offline
              TIG Moderator
              last edited by

              << IS .push() ! πŸ˜‰
              Ruby has many dialects...

              TIG

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Dan RathbunD Offline
                Dan Rathbun
                last edited by

                @frankn said:

                @Chris, I've never heard of grep before, ...
                @Dan, ... Again, you're using grep which I have no clue of what it does ...

                The docs for SketchUp API classes do not list standard Ruby methods that are inherited. (This is normal also in the Standard Ruby docs, however the latter lists what libraries are "mixed" in. The SketchUp docs do not. [I know I have requested this be changed.])

                To list the ancestors of a class, use the ancestors() method:
                Sketchup::Entities.ancestors %(#008000)[>> [Sketchup::Entities, Enumerable, Object, Kernel]]

                Checking on Enumerable shows that it is actually a library "mixin" module, that is mixed into collection type objects, to give them extended common functionality.

                Consult the Standard Ruby Documentation to read the reference on the Enumerable library. (It is online, and I also posted the downloadable CHM (compiled HTML Help Markup,) in the Ruby Resources thread. (Follow the link in signature line.)

                [Code] Grepping entities

                πŸ’­

                I'm not here much anymore.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Dan RathbunD Offline
                  Dan Rathbun
                  last edited by

                  @tig said:

                  << IS .push() ! πŸ˜‰
                  Ruby has many dialects...

                  The correct term would be aliases, ...

                  ... however this example is not a case of a simple method alias.
                  In fact looking at the C code.. both methods call the C-side function %(#0080BF)[rb_ary_push] with different arguments.

                  Synopsis:

                  BOTH Ruby methods return the receiver array, so call chaining can be used.

                  <<() takes ONE argument.

                  push() can take a multiple argument list.


                  a = []

                  a << 1,2,3 %(#008000)[Error: #<SyntaxError: (eval): compile error (eval): syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting $end a << 1,2,3 _______^>]

                  a <<( 1,2,3 ) %(#008000)[Error: #<SyntaxError: (eval): compile error (eval): syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting $end a <<( 1,2,3 ) ________^>]

                  a.<<( 1,2,3 ) %(#008000)[Error: #<ArgumentError: (eval):0:in<<': wrong number of arguments (3 for 1)>
                  (eval)
                  (eval):0]`

                  a.push( 1,2,3 ) %(#008000)[[1, 2, 3]]

                  πŸ€“

                  I'm not here much anymore.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Dan RathbunD Offline
                    Dan Rathbun
                    last edited by

                    @frankn said:

                    One suggestion if I may do so, maybe this should be added to the code snippets thread?

                    I added a link to TIG's post, to the "Code Snippets" Subject Index, under the title:

                    "Collecting definitions that ARE parents of component instances"

                    My one-liner is not worthy, it will slow down as the model gets bigger (and does not ignore images & groups.)

                    I'm not here much anymore.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Chris FullmerC Offline
                      Chris Fullmer
                      last edited by

                      Frankn, just to clarify for myself, but you really want only components that have sub-components in them? or is it that you want a list of definitions whose instances are NOT sub-components?

                      Lately you've been tan, suspicious for the winter.
                      All my Plugins I've written

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • danielbowringD Offline
                        danielbowring
                        last edited by

                        The parent of every ComponentInstance
                        Sketchup.active_model.definitions.map() {|e| e.instances }.flatten.map() {|e| e.parent}.uniq

                        Every ComponentDefinition that has sub-components
                        Sketchup.active_model.definitions.find_all() {|e| e.entities.find() {|e| e.class == Sketchup::ComponentInstance } }

                        Every ComponentInstance that has sub-components
                        Sketchup.active_model.definitions.find_all() {|e| e.entities.find() {|e| e.class == Sketchup::ComponentInstance } }.map() {|e| e.instances }.flatten

                        To get the parent of a Entity, use entity.parent.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • F Offline
                          Frankn
                          last edited by

                          @chris fullmer said:

                          Frankn, just to clarify for myself, but you really want only components that have sub-components in them? or is it that you want a list of definitions whose instances are NOT sub-components?

                          Hey Chris, I wanted to be able to find the parent definition of components with subcomponets that aren't in the model but still in the definition list. Hope that makes sense... but if it doesn't, basically the 2nd code that Tig shared is what I wanted to accomplish.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • 1 / 1
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          Buy SketchPlus
                          Buy SUbD
                          Buy WrapR
                          Buy eBook
                          Buy Modelur
                          Buy Vertex Tools
                          Buy SketchCuisine
                          Buy FormFonts

                          Advertisement