I should point out that the List.Clean on the right is the one that I replaced in the DYN file using your directions and a script, and the List.Clean on the left is one that I just brought in from the side bar, so if I made a mistake with one on the right in my script the one on the left shouldve still worked, bu alas neither of them do. Please advise.
Also, please advise if your method stated above will handle nodes that are set at different levels and or lacing, and how to change them if not. And if they will behave the same in those settings as the older nodes.
I did in fact follow your steps listed above, but you didnt give instructions on how to fix all the other nodes from your DanEDU package. Only the List.Clean node. So in perpetuity, I thought it was the only thing that was …possible… to replicate between the different nodes in their migration, because it was the only thing they had in common.
So for each node, I would:
then I would:
But here it was not explained what to do with EACH node. So I assumed to replicate this step between all the other nodes I would simply just remove the |DanEDU from the nickname. to replicate this step for all the other nodes, because this is all it says to do here.
then I would:
Then add the assembly in the end of the line with isPinned="false">
extend this to isPinned="false" assembly="..\..\AppData\Roaming\Dynamo\Dynamo Revit\1.3\packages\Orchid\bin\OrchidGeneric.dll" function="Orchid.Generic.Core.List.Clean@var..,var..">
but at this point is confusing to me, because this process does NOT convert
Convert_13.dyn (38.5 KB)
Well I must say when I tried converting the DanEDU_Nodes_13.dyn file to Orchid using your Convert_13.dyn script, it worked like a charm! However when I tried to convert my script, I got a warning here, and the file it wrote to was empty.
Thanks for this real-life example, the problem you meet was, if you don’t use all the nodes, then you need to filter out all those nodes you don’t use…
Therefore, have I updated my graph for converting Dynamo 1.3.x graphs in the post above. Dynamo 2.0.x graphs works differently meaning that graph don’t need any update.
I have migrated your file (to Dynamo 1.3.x and 2.0.x), but I can’t verify the file…
Your graph is enormously and chaotic. I would presume that even the nodes are migrated, something will be lost in translation. Especially nodes from those packages I don’t have might fail, meaning nodes could be removed. Dynamo 2.0.x is very sensitive towards missing packages!
Thank you very much for these graphs, you really didnt have to do them for me, if you share the graph that you modified to migrate these files Id love to look at them and possibly learn something. However upon initial review I notice some weird things happening, take for instance this one section of my graph where I use 2 of your nodes three times each. Why is one of them different than the others? They dont look right. Is this a lacing issue? Are there two types of each of these nodes and its getting confused perhaps? Please advise. Original 1.3 graph:
Well I am certainly willing to go try this on other, smaller graphs, but there is no telling if I will be able to duplicate this particular error on different graphs. The bug exists somewhere in there, indicated by this graph. But ill try to find similar errors on smaller graphs, but it might take me a while to find it. I can show you where this particular section of the graph is if it is to big for you to find if you would like however.
you can try to make a copy of your graph, and erase a huge number of the other nodes, keeping only those close to where error occur, then I can try to run the migration on those… try to keep it to around 20 nodes or so.
Ok, I will do that. I will trim down this file and send you a smaller version. In the mean time can you please explain why the conversion of the GetItemAtIndex node no longer works the same way? You can see here, that the old graph and new migrated graph, run with exactly the same information, fails at these nodes. these nodes appear to process information differently and that scares me. Is there a way to fix this? Please advise. Thanks!
I don’t want to use my time in walking around in your files… so you need to lower it to an amount where it is doable for me to work with in a text editor. Therefor, lower it to around 20 nodes or try to figure it yourselves.
Hello my friend,
I dont understand, there are more than 20 nodes upstream of where the problem occurs. You want me to delete all the nodes including the problem area all the way back so that there are only 20 nodes, so you can look at it? That doesnt make any sense to me. What exactly do you want to look at? I reduced the file by 70%, per your request, to a minimum where it still contains the problem area. There seems to be a problem in this area with your code. It is mis-replacing one of your nodes. You just want to leave it like this? thanks,
This problem occurs due to you haven’t changed the node from my deprecated package to the new package for quite a long time. This is something you know will give you a raising number of problems and still you have continued using something which is not supported. Time will only make it worse.
I have gone much further than anyone else would have done. I am sure anyone else would have written shift the deprecated nodes with the new node and that would have been the only answer given!
I have made this post showing how changing could be done manually and I have even topped that up with a graph which can solve the problem… however, I (as anyone else making packages) has no possibility to take all considerations into account and I don’t want to.
I make this package for free, anyone can use it as they please but on your own accountability.
This community is not a do my job or fix my problems community. We all do this voluntarily for free!
Therefore, I have to pull back from giving any further assistance on this issue. You need to change those nodes, you must figure a way. I will not support something which is deprecated (long time ago) beyond what I have done.
As @erfajo noted, this ‘share’ was done after an issue was pointed out. The tool is there, but it’s on each of us to use it (or not) as per our individual needs and skill sets. I’m closing this post now as it’s starting to go way beyond the ‘hey look at this cool tool I built to help upgrade migrations’ topic.