Leaderboard

Broadcast Actor.zip Hello All! I'm looking for a little bit of feedback on an Actor I've put together. The zip file attached contains an Actor called "Broadcast Actor". I know the idea of a "broadcast" partially goes against the AF rules but bare with me. The reason I put this together is because the idea of an abstract message was driving me a little crazy. I probably haven't had it properly explained to me but in any case I decided to try and build something that accomplished a similar task as an Abstract Message while also maintaining the low/zero coupling abstract messages provide. I do know Interfaces are out and about in LabVIEW 2020 but this approach is for older code bases that we can't quite upgrade yet. I loosely based this approach on DQMH which has an interesting architecture for messages going "up the tree" using broadcasts (user events), that parent modules register for when they start up. I figured something like this could also be implemented in an Actor. The attached broadcast actor has a message that returns its own populated "Event Cluster". Calling actors can call this message and are returned this "Event Cluster". The parent actor can then register for all of the events of the child actor in their Actor Core. I know reply messages are kind of discouraged in AF but this also felt like an okay way to use them. Once the child actor is up and running it can call it's own broadcasts which the parent can hear and do something intelligent with. My understanding of "low coupling" is limited, but I *think* this approach would prevent the parent actor from being loaded into memory if we are just trying to load the child actor. Maybe I'm way off or maybe this has been done before but it felt like a way to not have to use abstract messages (a barrier for some people to adopt AF), but also allow for low coupling between the actors themselves. Any and all feedback is welcome. What am I missing? -John Hoehner

Isn't that common knowledge in our field? When I attended Technical University, that was one of mandatory classes. In case of LabVIEW, the compiler is LLVM. Meaning anyone who looked into clang also looked into that. The amount of developers who looked into CLang or GCC isn't as small as you suggest. This is actually quite common, if a job requires that. I used LLVM as well at some point, ie. I worked on optimizations performed on Intermediate Language tree. And it so happens that in "Heap Peek", you can look at that IL for any VI.

I work 5 years as labview 'developer' and when someone from other technologies asks me how this compiles and really works my answer is i ve no idea. When on the other side open technologies give much deeper ride and control. It might be due to my limited understanding of LV but detailed information is not there on official NI forums. I guess it is up to discussion if You need low level understanding how LV or other technology works. In my case as sw engineer I always want to know how things work, and the longer i work as engineer i realize i ve no idea how 90% of things work