Leaderboard

You asked for it. A little cleaning went a long way, just did not have a chance to document things very well (have to jog my memory for that). This was built with piecemeal documentation, mostly to the original iso-spec, and with a lot of reverse engineering. Seems to work as well as my iPhone reader, hard to tell which one is the problem in a few corner cases. Not sure if I want to be on the hook for documentation/support if I posted to the CR, maybe a NI community page is in order, or Mr Mike will sort his out and add to the page. By all means let me know of any bugs, certainly a lot of version/EC combinations have not been tried. QR Generator.llb

Damn right! Oh, and welcome to LAVA - it's lovely to see you here! For those who haven't met Emilie, she's a stalwart at NI Week and has been an advocate for us within NI - certainly a big plus having her here on LAVA

iEmilie: I haven't really been worried about the "hate LV" blog post. I kind of enjoy reading it. In my eyes, LabVIEW seems to come out pretty well in that thread. I figure there's always going to be someone angry at us, so the existence of the thread itself doesn't bother me. What I like is that in all of the pro-LV comments, whether from NI or not, people reply with calmness, reasonableness and helpful advice. I've read that thread a few times over the years and thought perhaps we should start an advertising campaign: "LabVIEW: Using it will make you a nicer person." :-) Various folks have said that reading that post was deflating. It shouldn't be. My list of "things I hate about LabVIEW" would be waaaaay more than just 10 things, and I guarantee some of them are far blacker marks against us than anything jshoer mentions. I cannot believe how incredibly stupid we have been over the years on some features (yes, I include features I created and now regret), and how long it is taking us to get certain upgrades. But I don't view these deficiencies as reasons to be depressed. LabVIEW is a growing language, adapting over 25 years to the changing technologies and customer bases. Doing what no one has ever done before sometimes means you get a less than optimal solution and you have to fix it up in round 2. Do we have more we can do? Yes. And we continue to work to improve. But the backbone of LabVIEW remains strong. Graphics is the only manageable way to express parallelism, and parallelism is the name of the game in the future. Have you guys seen the parallel keywords that Microsoft has been introducing into the other languages lately? Everything needs to be parallel, but procedural programming is a dead end. There is only so far you can go with compiler analysis of procedural code and manual control of mutexes before you hit a wall and flat out say, "No, I need a system that is designed for multicore from the outset." Between our parallel expression on the desktop and our ability to target FPGAs, I'm thrilled about LV's future, and all the complaining is just the list of tasks we need to be tackling on our way there. When I started at NI, on my first day, I saw a sign by Jeff K's desk: "You know you have built a successful product when people use it for things you never intended and criticize you for being short sighted." The "hate LV" post is just one of the sign posts of our success.