Leaderboard

Version changes concern me. They mean a lot of work for me revalidating my 1800+ vis. That's the main reason I went from 7.1.1 to 8.6.1 and bypassed all the other versions. I figured by the time 8.6.1 came out, all the bugs were out of the version 8 software. So NI's new "Major Version Release Every Year" paradigm really concerns me. When they release software with a new major number that means to me they have made major revisions/additions/changes. Otherwise, why make it look like a different product? I don't need a lot of fancy new features every single year; I need to know the code I already have is going to work and not be broken when I upgrade. Even worse, I don't want something to still work, but work *differently* from the way it did before (this one bit me in 8.6.1 -- so much for waiting). I would much rather see LV2009 SP2 be released next August, not LV2010. And if LV2010 will be, in essence, just more bug fixes for LV2009, then NI shouldn't change the version number. I would actually feel comfortable upgrading then.

Yeah - I agree that the wording on that webpage should be a little better than it currently is. At least the bugfix and SSP sentances could be spaced much further apart...

Here is an implementation using F12 as a hot key. The input data VIs are used instead of the key down event in the event structure when using hot keys in programs designed to run in the background so the key will be captured even when the program is minimized or hidden. The event method only works when the key is pressed when the front panel is active. copy date time to clipboard.vi

Just my 2 cents... Faith. Faith is belief in the unseen or unproven. Knowledge on the other hand comes from proof or eveidence. I don't know how well the following analogy will go in places were dogs are bad but here goes anyway. lets say i wanted a pet and I had to choose between a real dog with real short-comings and building a robot dog. The robot dog would alwys do the right thing because I programmed to do the right thing. Now in the case of the real dog, its actions are not neccesarily programmed (trained). A When it meets me at the door excited to see me, it means a lot more than if the robot did it. So now cast yourself for the moment as God and ask yourself if you would prefer to watch eternity play out with robots that always did waht was expeted and real creatures that had the oppertunity to choose to do good of their own accord. The story of Abraham and his willingness to sacrafice his ONLY son (in an age when a son represented social security) was a story of faith. To use the remains of a person of faith to PROVE defats the end goal of faith. Ben

QUOTE (Norm Kirchner @ Jul 28 2008, 11:24 AM) Ditto on that. You should pass the User Event Refnum. Then just register your events at the event structure. You can have multiple event structures registered for the same event. Also, you don't really need to "pass" it. You can just as easily use a functional global that stores the User Event Refnum(s).

You keep talking about passing the Event Reg Ref... and I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet but you can not pass that reference around. The proper usage of it is to be used within the same chain of VI's as in same VI as event structure or maybe passed out of a subVI for simplicity purposes only to be passed to the calling VI but never to a dynamically called VI. If you really wanted to do bare bones on this w/ no events. All you would use is an occurance (IMHO) Pass the occurance to the dynamic VI and wait on it in the main vi. Thats it.