Network not giving the results (that I) expeced

gustaf's Avatar


29 Nov, 2013 03:31 PM

What I do:

  • create a "range" node (1-10)
  • create an "add" node connected to the range node
  • right click and turn add node into a subnetwork
  • enter the network
  • create a "first" node to the add node
  • set the "first" node as rendered
  • leave the network and set it to rendered

what i expect:

I expect it to give me the result of the "first" node inside the network (0.0)

what I get:

the whole range of numbers.

I have attached a nodebox3 file to show the problem. I expect the network to output the same result as the two top level nodes next to it, but it doesnt.

while on the topic of nested networks:
I dont think it is a good idea to let whatever node inside the network that is set as rendered to be the official output of it. The reason being that if i quickly need to go in to a subnetwork and do some work and look at what the nodes inside produce then I dont want to risk forgetting to set the render flag back to the right node. I have suggestions to how this could be handled if anyone is interested.


  1. Support Staff 1 Posted by Frederik De Ble... on 02 Dec, 2013 10:15 AM

    Frederik De Bleser's Avatar

    Hey Gustaf,

    I've looked at your network and it seems to do what is intended; that is, there is no bug in NodeBox.

    The question is: what do you want to do? It looks like you're trying to sum all the numbers or something?

    About the issue of the rendered node in the subnetwork: we're aware of that, it is indeed irritating and we're thinking of a fix.

  2. 2 Posted by gustaf on 02 Dec, 2013 10:30 AM

    gustaf's Avatar

    hmm. What I am trying to do is just get the first value of a list. The "add" node doesnt do anything and is only there because, well, thats how i ran in to this problem.

    If you look at the result of the two nodes on the left (add+first) you see a single value as the result (0.0), right?

    If you look inside the group on the right hand side you see that it has the same two nodes (add+first) inside of it, but it doesnt produce the same result. Instead of returning a single value (0.0), it returns the full range of 10 values.

    Is this what you see as well? If it is, please explain why the group on the right shouldnt produce the same result as the two nodes on the left.


  3. Support Staff 3 Posted by Frederik De Ble... on 02 Dec, 2013 10:53 AM

    Frederik De Bleser's Avatar

    Okay, I see your problem. This is related to how NodeBox does list matching.
    Basically, it treats the network as a function, and will call it with each element of the list. In your case, that means it will take the first element of the list, add zero to it, then take the first element (but there's already only one element) and return that. Then it will do the same for the second element, and append that to the bigger list. If you're familiar with functional operation, it basically performs a map operation over all the elements.

    This is the default behavior but you can change it. In the metadata for the network, select the published port and set the "range" to "list". This means that NodeBox will work on the entire list at once, not one-by-one. Then you see that the network works as the nodes in the root.

    For more information, you can read How NodeBox Works, specifically the part on list matching.

    Hope this helps!


  4. Support Staff 4 Posted by Frederik De Ble... on 02 Dec, 2013 10:54 AM

    Frederik De Bleser's Avatar

    Here's a screenshot showing the metadata setting:

  5. 5 Posted by gustaf on 02 Dec, 2013 09:19 PM

    gustaf's Avatar

    aaaaaaaaaah slaps forhead

    May I give a suggestion for the subnetwork output? Having special "input" and "output" nodes that you put inside the network that creates a virtual bridge to the parent nodes in and out points seems to work very well in other programs.

    Could also avoid any backwards compatibility issues with some kind of "if (no output nodes exist) then output the render-flagged node" ?

  6. Support Staff 6 Posted by Frederik De Ble... on 03 Dec, 2013 09:59 AM

    Frederik De Bleser's Avatar

    Yes – having "inlets" and an "outlet" is something we're considering, since the issue you mention causes lots of confusion. This requires a conversion from published ports to inlets/outlets.

    I've added an issue that tracks this:

Reply to this discussion

Internal reply

Formatting help / Preview (switch to plain text) No formatting (switch to Markdown)

Attaching KB article:


Already uploaded files

  • ndbx3subNetworkHmm.ndbx 1.24 KB

Attached Files

You can attach files up to 10MB

If you don't have an account yet, we need to confirm you're human and not a machine trying to post spam.

Keyboard shortcuts


? Show this help
ESC Blurs the current field

Comment Form

r Focus the comment reply box
^ + ↩ Submit the comment

You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac

Recent Discussions

23 Apr, 2024 07:54 PM
19 Apr, 2024 04:41 AM
16 Apr, 2024 06:18 PM
16 Apr, 2024 04:23 AM
08 Apr, 2024 01:28 AM


07 Apr, 2024 11:50 PM
05 Apr, 2024 11:47 PM
05 Apr, 2024 12:30 AM
25 Mar, 2024 08:48 PM
14 Mar, 2024 07:40 PM
14 Mar, 2024 07:38 PM