All Activity

A PR with null handling alone would make it a lot easier to slot into shared code, so this sounds like a solid path forward.

That timing difference is easy to miss, especially when the IDE leaves enough breathing room for cleanup. Built apps tend to expose it fast.

The separate floating bit is the real win there, especially for palettes that need to hang outside a cramped panel. Subpanels get boxed in fast.

The LabVIEW IDE itself clearly isn't the scary part here, it's the bundled driver stack dragging old assumptions into new hardware. Custom installs are a bit of a pain, but less painful than a recovery loop.

Lo de cerrar el puerto tras una sola trama suena ya a la lógica de lectura, no al JPG. Al menos al quitar Byte a Port apareció el problema real, que ya es bastante avance.

A breakdown by topic would already make it feel less like a black box, even without showing every answer.

The PRAGMA route is nice since it keeps the LabVIEW side unchanged. Deployment still feels like the part where people get surprised, especially keeping the matching SQLCipher DLL with the app.

A minimal repro would at least separate a Messenger issue from the usual RT deployment quirks. The Windows versus deployed RT split is always where the fun starts.

AI makes the text-language side move faster, but it doesn't magically replace all the existing test benches and hardware drivers. LabVIEW may shrink, sure, but legacy maintenance can be a very long tail.

ARM emulation might get past the installer, but the odds of a stable LabVIEW IDE after that sound pretty grim. This is one of those cases where a native x86 box is less hassle than becoming part-time distro maintainer.

A curated wiki could outlast both chat logs and forum search, especially for those recurring LV gotchas. Discord is great for speed, but useful answers disappear into the scroll pretty fast.

Create SubVI really ought to inherit the same basics, especially connector settings. Copying chunks into a template works, but it gets old fast when it is part of the normal edit loop.

That is useful, but what about when you want to 'Create Subvi' from selection? I do this quite often and am tired of having to redo my defaults. I've been copying and pasting sections into a template instead.

Rather than disrupt the forums themselves, perhaps an AI agent to scan threads and produce candidate wiki entries would be a good use of AI to collect and organize the tribal knowledge. Same with Discord. And in regard to immediacy, I think that's a big reason the Discord has grown so rapidly in our little LV community.

I'm a programmer, not a social worker. My AI concerns are around privacy, confidentiality and data exfiltration. I don't really do hand-wringing, feely stuff. My discussion input, in this thread, is about how to keep lavag.org relevant by utilising AI instead of just trying to defend against it. One way is to make lavag.org interactive when the few that still inhabit the forum (and the even fewer that answer questions) are asleep or do not have domain expertise. People with questions often want answers quickly because they have already spent days trying to resolve something and a forum is last resort. AI means that they may not have to wait 2 weeks for Rolf or you to come back from holiday to get something targeted, specific and useful.

You may not care @ShaunR, but I and others do. You favour pragmatism. I understand the appeal and the benefits of a "first interaction support" AI. My concerns center on the long-term, collective social and cognitive side effects of AI dependence and replacing human interactions with AI interactions. (AI can be used well or poorly) Are you interested in exploring this topic further?

It’s been a few years since large language models became widely available, so I’m curious about what the situation looks like for you when it comes to LabVIEW projects. Are you seeing a decline in interest? Are clients moving toward other programming languages? And a question for those of you who have had the opportunity to develop software using AI agents: after seeing what they are capable of, do you still feel motivated to develop software in LabVIEW? I have to admit that, from my perspective, AI agents have made incredible progress over the past two years. They can now create, test, and even deploy genuinely high-quality code. In my opinion, the LabVIEW market will start shrinking month by month, until eventually what remains will mostly be legacy systems that still need to be maintained.

That's such a Linux thing. "Ask it the way I want or you 4 pages of me berating you about how to ask a question". Asking erudite questions is simply an efficiency. Don't care. Never did. Overrated. There are symposiums and meetups for that. The forums are just a way to organise it. I don't see any downsides here. Got anything else?

Being on-topic is easy for an LLM to achieve. Being useful is harder, and that definitely hasn't been achieved in this case. So it's just time-wasting slop. Probably. Same purpose(s) as all other spambots, just using new tools: Either they will edit their posts later to insert spam links, or they're just vandalizing for the sake of it. That would indeed be putting AI to much better use. This part has harmful side-effects. Software community forums everywhere are shrivelling up, and I bet that one big reason is because people now talk to bots more, and talk to each other less. Sure, this makes answers more readily accessible, but the costs are: The loss of motivation to learn how to ask questions well. The loss of opportunities to share our knowledge with others directly. The loss of human networking in general. These activities have intrinsic social value beyond just acquiring information.

AI bot's seem fairly obvious to me, ATM. They don't really understand comma's and lists. On a different note. I've thought Lavag would be a good place for it's own AI bot. It could link questions to previous resolved answers. Automatically identify cross-posts. Guard against spam bots etc. Lavag.org is a huge resource that could be targeted domain training. Known meat-sacks could upvote and downvote the AI bot's response to train it. Too many downvotes, it disappears from the responses so as to not pollute with stupid responses. I think lavag could utilise a simple AI as a first interaction support. The expertise of a years worth of LabVIEW (experienced intern). A users question is usually a much better search criteria than the site search where you need to know the keywords.

I'm a bit surprised that there is such a strong activity in recent days on this forum. On one side we should be happy but on the other, they all share similar traits: - They are all from new accounts created within the last ~24 hours or so with names that look quite made up - They all tend to be one hit or two hit wonders, which is still questionable - Their answer is kind of on topic but also at the same time rather generic in some ways - They all claim to use LabVIEW 2020 and working with LabVIEW since 2015 Are we witnessing a new wave of AI generated spam posts? What could be the purpose?

The abrupt close is a pretty rough finish for an online exam, a simple results page would save a lot of confusion. Without answer review, that score is mostly just a gate pass, not much of a learning tool.

Forum software probably has a stale embed whitelist, which is a bit ironic for an XKCD about dependencies. Plain links still do the job, meh.

Searchability is the bit Discord never quite nails, even with channels. A forum thread is way less exciting in the moment but still useful six months later.

Seems like the security check is flaky rather than the password rules. Weird that posting in the thread nudged it into working, but at least the account got through.