WHY?????

[Dan Ebberts]

You need to isolate the x component of the wiggle,
like this:

x = wiggle(1,100)[0];
y = 0;
z = 0;
[x,y,z]

Dan

[Jesper Hellvik andersen]

Thanks Dan

You wrote:

“You need to isolate the x component of the wiggle,
like this:

x = wiggle(1,100)[0];
y = 0;
z = 0;
[x,y,z]

Dan”

But how come I only have to do that with the x position and not the y and z? I know coding is supposed to be logical, but this seems to me to be some kind “well that’s just how it is” kinda thing.

Cheers
Jesper

[Darby Edelen]

[Jesper Hellvik Andersen] “But how come I only have to do that with the x position and not the y and z? I know coding is supposed to be logical, but this seems to me to be some kind “well that’s just how it is” kinda thing.”

The wiggle() function returns a vector of the same dimensions as the one it was given.

Now you may be thinking “I didn’t give it a vector!” but wiggle() uses the property it is applied to as its source, in your case:

wiggle(1,100);

is the same thing as

position.wiggle(1,100);

Since a 3D position is a 3 dimensional vector (x, y and z), the wiggle() function will return a 3 dimensional vector. In your original code you were assigning a 3 dimensional vector to the first element of a 3 dimensional vector and two scalar values to the 2nd and 3rd elements:

[[x,y,z],y,z]

What Dan did is simply take the x value of the wiggled 3 dimensional vector instead of all 3 of the values:

wiggle(1,100)[0] //returns the first value of the wiggled vector instead of all 3 values

It is perfectly logical… at least if you’ve been talking to computers long enough =)

Darby Edelen
Designer
Left Coast Digital
Santa Cruz, CA