Leaderboard

Actually, if you re-read my posts in this thread without the filter that you seem to have applied to them then you'll notice that I don't come down on either side - I'm asking questions, just like you are, I'm just asking them in different ways. I'm not a socialist, democrat (in the true definition of the word), a republican (in the politicized definition of the word), a Labour, Liberal, Green, Independant, Tory or anything else for that matter (well, maybe a constitutional monachist for the moment ). In fact, I'm about as anti-political as you can get. I'm disgusted like you are that some moron fiddled the numbers for whatever reason (you'll notice that from some of my posts) and that that moron, in a way, represents the field of engineering, but I'm also not so political that I'm going to assume that means that all of the research in the field is bogus. I'm also not going to try to use emotionally-charged terminology to try to bait a response out of anyone. If you want to apply this horrific root issue to other socialtal problems like redistribution of wealth then I gotta say that I'm way out of my depth there, so I choose not to engage (since, it seems, that any attempt at conjecture on my part is assumed to be my staunch politcal and sociatal view of the world, which it most-certainly is not). I'm all for debate, and I live to to think outside the box - but don't for a second assume that every question I post in the LAVA lounge is representative of my views - they're questions, not statements. That said, if the conjectures and ideas in this or any other thread form your view of me, then so be it - there's nothing I can do about that other than state my case and let you make up your mind. Until then, I'd ask you to keep away from personal profiling - if you want to talk about climate change, redistribution of wealth, systems of government or whatever other topic then go for it, but don't try to characterize me, especially since I haven't even done that myself.

The most useful and practical stuff I've learned is geared around designing applications to make them easier to understand and maintain. One of the biggest lessons I've learned is that I must manage (i.e. limit) the dependencies between code modules. If I don't pay attention to the dependencies my application devolves into a big ball of mud. Managing dependencies correctly results in good encapsulation, which in turn gives you better applications. You mentioned a software background, so I'll assume you are familiar with OOP. There are a couple things I suggest to improve your skills: Get a couple OOP design pattern books. The two I have are Head First Design Patterns and Design Patterns by the GoF. The first is written for Java but I have no Java background and had no trouble understanding it. It is very approachable and an excellent book to introduce you to many common design patterns. The second is the first encyclopedia of design patterns. It offers more concise explanations of them and has more patterns than the first. Write code in your spare time. Lots of it. Figure out how you would implement a design pattern in Labview, then do it. Differences in programming languages mean not all patterns apply to all languages. If there are multiple ways to implement a solution to a problem, spend some time implementing all the different solutions and building mock applications around them to see what works well and what doesn't. I spent a about a month and a half of nights and weekends just experimenting with different ways of using user events. I certainly don't know everything about them, but I have a much better understanding of when they should be used and when they shouldn't. Build a basic 2-player checkers game in Labview. Then try to extend it. What if the players want to be able to select the color of their pieces? What if they want to play on a 10x10 board? What if they wanted to have optional rules like the requirement to jump an opponent? What if they want to play Fox and Hounds instead of checkers? What if they want to play chess? What if they wanted to play against a computer player? How easy would it be to extend your original code to meet these new requirements? What obstacles did you run into? How could you have designed your original application to make it easier to extend? Of course, this is the kind of knowledge that helps me write better applications, not pass the certification exams.

Use Events and the menu reference created on right-clicking a control.

I calculated that this is actually 2.3% and if 97.7% of the population is working it means they are below animal level and are prostitues of the secret police. And in case it wasn't obvious enough, my point is that making a claim like that is unfounded, because what makes 4-6% the magic number? I don't claim to have an answer, but my basic point is what crelf and others have claimed - you (or at least I) don't know, so this debate is mostly pointless (which is basically why I haven't participated at all in this discussion).

I wrote an article on the subject a few years back on ExpressionFlow expressionflow.com/2008/06/02/extending-labview-built-applications-with-lvoop-plugins/ Tomi

Back from the holidays, Happy New Year All !!! Seems a little cold around the world these days ... hmmm (checkmate .... again). Now back to the lecture ... Crelf, you have proven that being a good LabVIEW programmer (not a fighter ...) does not carry over to having a rational debate about the GW scare, and the related real topic of re-distribution of wealth. Your probably love socialism as you are too young to have experienced anything else. A young socialist that has been nurtured to depend huge government for all of your needs. One tip: Any country with a constant unemployment rate (over say 10-15 recent years time) of above 4-6% is a system that is not working. Hmmm, lets look at some European socialist countries like France & Germany for example .... do I see 7, 8, 9 10 and above ? So to uncover your (un) consciouness some more, you also have sipped the coolaid into believing that the early 1910's style American Progressive movement, rooted from facism and what the globama folks want to see here is a good one. Most young and old progressives (read re-gressive & communist/facist) when I quiz them don't know the real roots of where it came from and that it has been around for about 100 years in the USA. But it fails each time because too many US cisitizens have read and understand what the Framers warned about that a degradation of freedom and increased gov control withs its associated tryanny will start in this type of form (like a bad fungus). I truly hope you haven't drank the progressive coolaid !!! Hopefully your not this Seond tip: look up Cloward & Pivan which is along the same lines "Rules for Radicals".. Yes, the big transformation that was announced by globama is this. See who he sourrounds himself. See what domestic & international (cap n tax) policies fit the design of the collaspe of the US. How does this fit in with the Founding Framers designs? Answer: it doesn't - at ALL !!! As for the Solar project being canceled, the reason was that this project was out of scope from division's main product line which is propulsion power. As for Capitalism and innovation among the private sector, many other companies in the US have and are pursuing this, like Boeing's owned sub which currently has the most efficient panels. Yes, Capitalism does work !!! But you already knew that ? I sure hope so .... if not, then I wonder about your other beliefs ... Summary: The GW scare is badly broken scientific process. Just like several hundred years ago "The Earth is Flat" mantra of "now lets don't question us Elites" and lets move zillions of money around the globe so we can FEEL better. Funny, during Moore's Law, at the same time common sense in the scientific community was 1/2 ing at the same rate. Which side of current history are you going to tell your children that you decided to be a part of. Relativsm (SF style even - yes I have relatives in the Bay area who are finally coming back from Planet Loon, but some aren't). The 60's experiment has failed. It fails the Math (ask the State Legislature in California). This is just another related topic. Hopefully soon (like beginning November 2010), true Math will prevail as does common sense and good processes!

Hello Joe! I've been using PAINT.NET to make the three button states. Copy a nice button from the web (free if possible) or create it from scratch if you're really good! For this one, I've copied the first state (False) and then superimposed a purple semi-transparent layer for the hover effect and a semi-transparent black layer for the true state. That's it... save then in png and you can use them to make a template installed in <lvdata>\LAVA\Control Templates\<template name>. I've got some problem with my Jing install, but I will make some tutorials on how to go from a to z with the framework. Say hello to Noah for me , François.