Leaderboard

So a couple of years ago I was reading about the ZLIB documentation on compression and how it works. It was an interesting blog post going into how it works, and what compression algorithms like zip really do. This is using the LZ77 and Huffman Tables. It was very education and I thought it might be fun to try to write some of it in G. The deflate function in ZLIB is very well understood from an external code call and so the only real ever so slight place that it made sense in my head was to use it on LabVIEW RT. The wonderful OpenG Zip package has support for Linux RT in version 4.2.0b1 as posted here. For now this is the version I will be sticking with because of the RT support. Still I went on my little journey trying to make my own in pure LabVIEW to see what I could do. My first attempt failed immensely and I did not have the knowledge, to understand what was wrong, or how to debug it. As a test of AI progression I decided to dig up this old code and start asking AI about what I could do to improve my code, and to finally have it working properly. Well over the holiday break Google Gemini delivered. It was very helpful for the first 90% or so. It was great having a dialog with back and forth asking about edge cases, and how things are handled. It gave examples and knew what the next steps were. Admittedly it is a somewhat academic problem, and so maybe that's why the AI did so well. And I did still reference some of the other content online. The last 10% were a bit of a pain. The AI hallucinated several times giving wrong information, or analyzed my byte streams incorrectly. But this did help me understand it even more since I had to debug it. So attached is my first go at it in 2022 Q3. It requires some packages from VIPM.IO. Image Manipulation, for making some debug tree drawings which is actually disabled at the moment. And the new version of my Array package 3.1.3.23. So how is performance? Well I only have the deflate function, and it only is on the dynamic table, which only gets called if there is some amount of data around 1K and larger. I tested it with random stuff with lots of repetition and my 700k string took about 100ms to process while the OpenG method took about 2ms. Compression was similar but OpenG was about 5% smaller too. It was a lot of fun, I learned a lot, and will probably apply things I learned, but realistically I will stick with the OpenG for real work. If there are improvements to make, the largest time sink is in detecting the patterns. It is a 32k sliding window and I'm unsure of what techniques can be used to make it faster. ZLIB G Compression.zip

We're back again this year. Free 24 hours of virtual LabVIEW presentations. Come join us! https://www.glasummit.org/ We're also looking for presenters. I know some of you all have a lot of opinions...

Are you seriously expecting anyone to install a random executable on their system from an unknown publisher, provided by an anonymous person on the web, where one can't even get a proper link in Google to the actual company page? Sorry, but anyone doing that should not be allowed near 5m of a computer system!

This is the nine year-old link I've saved for this - Solved: Re: New VI - default window size - NI Community It behaves oddly in that if you change it and close it before saving, it won't prompt you to save. Anyone understand this?

The recovery loop forcing is most likely related to the installation of DAQmx and other NI driver software that make under the hood use of NI-PAL and friends which is really part of the NI-PXI driver software stack. This driver goes fairly deep into the Windows PCI hardware driver stack and newer Windows versions tend to enable the newest features in the PCI chipsets. Some of these features did not even exist in the standard when DAQmx and NI-PAL that come with the standard install of LabVIEW 2020 were released. So if you want to install an older version of LabVIEW on a recent hardware, it is actually best to choose a custom install and disable installation of all hardware drivers and then install the latest version of the drivers you actually need that are still compatible with your LabVIEW version. That's of course cumbersome and the long term solution is indeed to move to a newer LabVIEW version altogether. But be aware that this problem will keep occurring. The times where hardware improvements were automatically always fully backwards compatible are definitely over. The PCI standard got so complicated over the years, and covers much more than just the traditional PCI slots that are almost unseen in modern computers. Pretty much every modern bus from USB3 and higher to Thunderbolt, all kinds of memory interfaces, and many more is nowadays using PCI technologies in one way or the other. Improving that without causing potential backwards compatibility problems got an almost impossible task. And each of the software component manufacturers from hardware firmware, to BIOS and chipset firmware to Windows drivers and vendor drivers such as NI-PAL would need to test their thing with everything else to be sure it still works. Which of course is impossible, so you end up with these issues. For LabVIEW itself I managed to install and use LabVIEW 2009 on Windows 11 without any real problems. I'm convinced that even LabVIEW 7.1 would be possible, although that most likely would require some careful hand holding and sweet talking to the installer to convince it to go fully through with it. And it might show some visual artefacts when running it under Windows 11. Hardware drivers on the other hand are a different story. The NI drivers go fairly deep into the system to allow high performance data acquisition and similar things and that has a big potential to run into compatibility trouble on newer hardware than what was available at the release date of the driver.

Hi there ! If this subject interest you, I'm currently working on a new State Machine Toolkit for LabVIEW. You can find some shorts videos about it here : https://www.youtube.com/@EmmanuelGeveaux Or some posts about it here : https://www.linkedin.com/posts/emmanuel-geveaux-93836130a_labview-statemachines-ugcPost-746286803261... This toolkit will be Open-Source, free for students, education purpose and within LabVIEW Community Edition use. I'd be happy to ear any feedback on those videos and posts. Best regards Emmanuel

This year I went to NI Connect (the new NI Week) for the first time in 7 years. I thought I would be the exception and see all those that have gone year after year. But it turns out that many of us this was our first year back, or some last year was their first year back since COVID. In general I think this is a good sign, that things are moving in the right direction. NI has some new leadership that has a LabVIEW focus, and at least at the moment appear to want to push adoption. Reversing the subscription only is a welcome change, but for many it hurt the inertia of business. Once a ship starts moving in the wrong direction it takes a while to come back. Or put another way, respect is lost in buckets and gained in drops. Plenty of businesses have likely moved away from LabVIEW and NI because of poor decisions, that in my opinion, were so NI would look more valuable for an Emerson sale. I'm in the Detroit area, and plan to retire doing LabVIEW. At the moment I think I can do that. Not long ago I didn't think that would be the case. We were just blindly paying the SSP each year. The subscription only model, made management here reevaluated things. We took a few years off. Then perpetual licenses came back again so we renewed. I think we will likely get a new perpetual license every 4 years or so. This will hurt NI since this means less users on the newest release finding issues. Building back trust will take time here, and this will likely play out in a similar way around the world for other companies.

It is not that LabVIEW MAY unregister the reference, but that it WILL unregister the reference as soon as the top level VI in whose hierarchy the reference was created goes idle. This is by design and the only way to prevent that is to either keep that hierarchy active until any other user of that refnum has finished or delegate creating of the refnum to the place where it is needed, for instance through a LV2 style global maintaining the reference in a shift register and when being called for the first time it will create the refnum if the shift register contains an invalid refnum. True Actor Framework design kind of mandates that all refnums are created in the context of where they are used not some other global instance that may or may not keep running for the time some Actor is using the refnum.

Hi everyone, Just want to share our open source project "Labview Python Bridge". Connect labview apps with python apps in realtime with multi-processing data queues. https://github.com/jmor2000/labview_python_bridge If anyone has any questions or suggestions for new developments / features, let me know. Cheers Jeff

Absolutely echo what Shaun says. Nobody banned them. But most who tried to use them have after some more or less short time run from them, with many hairs ripped out of their head, a few nervous tics from to much caffeine consume and swearing to never try them again. The idea is not really bad and if you are willing to suffer through it you can make pretty impressive things with them, but the execution of that idea is anything but ideal and feels in many places like a half thought out idea that was eventually abandoned when it was kind of working but before it was a really easily usable feature.

Seems like this one has "escaped everyone's grasp" too. ParallelLoop.ShowAllSchedules=True Because was only checked from the password-protected diagram of ParallelForLoopDialog.vi (LabVIEW 20xx\resource\dialog). Present since LabVIEW 2010. When activated, allows to apply more advanced iteration partitioning schedule. In other words, instead of this you will get this Сould this be useful? I can't say. Maybe in some very specific use-cases. In my quick tests I didn't manage to get increase in any productivity. It's easy to mess up with those options and make things worse, than by default. Also can be changed by this scripting counterpart.

Look at this new download on VIPM https://www.vipm.io/package/bjm_lib_request_power/

You want an ability to override the Equality or Comparison operators? I'm unsure, whether it really existed in OpenG packages, but now you have those neat malleable VIs, that let you do that: Search Unsorted 1D Array , Sort 1D Array , Search Sorted 1D Array. They have an additional input to specify your own equals or less function in a form of a custom comparison class or a VI refnum. There's an article to help: Creating a Custom Sorting Function in LabVIEW

This is exactly what was said in that ancient thread: Tree control in labview. So if you add 65536*N to the Item Symbols property of the Listbox and have the "Enable Indentation" option activated, you shift the symbol/glyph and the text N levels to the right. Could be useful for simple 'parent-child' relationships, if you don't want to use a Tree. And still it's used in Find Examples / NI Example Finder window:

This toolkit offer you an efficient, stable, and reliable front panel control value refresh function. User can design their UI dashboard without any code development. 1. Powerful parallel execution capability, Support clone reentrant execution running mode, you can create multi dashboard UIs at the same time and controls can synchronous refresh across different UI. 2. High-speed data refresh capability, even with thousands of controls on a single UI, can easily maintain a refresh rate of 50ms while consuming very little CPU resources. 3. Support all control data types that "Tag Engine" support, this mean the only thing you need to do is to change the control "Label" with "Tag name", then the control will refresh automatically. 4. Support "muParser Expression", you can type the control "Label" with "Expression" that muParser Expression support, For example "a + b" "a > 1 & b >= 2".

I've generally been recommending using at least 2025 because the project dependency list is no longer saved in the project file (it got recalculated at loading anyways), making GIT commits cleaner. And the in-place save for previous (introduced with 2024) is really nice to have. I have been using 2026Q1 for my development, including a major refactoring of my HAL architecture. I've had very few issues, almost all of which were fixed by clearing the object compile cache regularly (something I have a habit of doing anyways since at least 2016). And just to throw it out there, we are expecting 2026Q3 to drop any day now. No promises from NI on a date, but we are in Q3 now.

If I had to do it static at compile time my choice would be to have a Create xxx vi for every class that needs to be creatable. I don't like the class constant on the diagram at all.

You should contact the developer. It may use features not available in earlier versions and it is a source control nightmare maintaining subtly difference versions.

I'll caveat this with this is only my opinion as a European. Market forces may be completely different to my perception in the US. When I first started, LabVIEW was basically a loss-leader to sell hardware. The sales people would give it away free (or heavily discounted) if you bought the hardware. It proliferated and people like myself learnt and expanded our capabilities. Over time it launched a small consultancy industry specialising in LabVIEW. There were a few major successes such as JKI and some partnerships along with single developer consultants. The test and measurement industry had few rivals to LabVIEW's capabilities. Fast forward to today and I think the emphasis is now firmly on large organisations with enormous hardware requirements-in particular governmental organisations. CERN is an obvious one in Europe (CERN being intergovernmental) but I believe there are many in the US. The Test and Measurement was, for the most part, lost to Python and although there are one or two consultants still operating in my neck of the woods, that part of the industry is basically gone here. So. In my view there is still an appreciable number of opportunities working for large companies' in the US and Europe but if you are looking to be a self employed contractor (in Europe) then you would be better off with something else.

Available in the new ECL version 4.6.0

Bit of a long shot but is your FPGA initialising Trig_0 in any way, e.g. Setting it to F on startup to get it into a known state? I've just recently fixed an issue on my 1085 system where everything was running normally until I used a FPGA card to set a trigger. Once this had happened the trigger was reserved by the FPGA and I could no longer control it through DAQmx even if I closed and restarted the DAQmx tasks, but I also didn't get any DAQmx errors.

There should be a forum on the dark side for that, but anyway, here you go. LabGRAD_21.zip

For fun. 😄 "Science isn't about why; it's about why not!" - Cave Johnson

Reentrant execution may be a safe option. Have to check the function. The zlib library is generally written in a way that should be multithreading safe. Of course that does NOT apply to accessing for instance the same ZIP or UNZIP stream with two different function calls at the same time. The underlaying streams (mapping to the according refnums in the VI library) are not protected with mutexes or anything. That's an extra overhead that costs time to do even when it would be not necessary. But for the Inflate and Deflate functions it would be almost certainly safe to do. I'm not a fan of making libraries all over reentrant since in older versions they were not debuggable at all and there are still limitations even now. Also reentrant execution is NOT a panacea that solves everything. It can speed up certain operations if used properly but it comes with significant overhead for memory and extra management work so in many cases it improves nothing but can have even negative effects. Because of that I never enable reentrant execution in VIs by default, only after I'm positively convinced that it improves things. For the other ZLIB functions operating on refnums I will for sure not enable it. It should work fine if you make sure that a refnum is never accessed from two different places at the same time but that is active user restraint that they must do. Simply leaving the functions non-reentrant is the only safe option without having to write a 50 page document explaining what you should never do, and which 99% of the users never will read anyways. 😁 And yes LabVIEW 8.6 has no Separated Compiled code. And 2009 neither.

With ZLib you just deflateInit, then call deflate over and over feeding in chunks and then call deflateEnd when you are finished. The size of the chunks you feed in is pretty much up to you. There is also a compress function (and the decompress) that does it all in one-shot that you could feed each frame to. If by fixed/dynamic you are referring to the Huffman table then there are certain "strategies" you can use (DEFAULT_STRATEGY, FILTERED, HUFFMAN_ONLY, RLE, FIXED). The FIXED uses a uses a predefined Huffman code table.

😅 You might be waiting a while, I'm mostly interested in compression, not decompression. That being said in the post I made, there is a VI called Process Huffman Tree and Process Data - Inflate Test under the Sandbox folder. I found it on the NI forums at some point and thought it was neat but I wasn't ready to use it yet. It isn't complete obviously but does the walking through of bits of the tree, to bytes. EDIT: Here is the post on NI's forums I found it on.

The Weather Station example that ships with LabVIEW shows a bit of this. but the data is not Base64, its just a pure characters,

I haven't had much time to investigate this until this month, but I think I've found the cause. XNodes on the production computer were not designed optimally. In the AdaptToInputs ability I was unconditionally passing a GenerateCode reply, thinking that the AdaptToInputs is only called when interacting with the XNode (connecting/disconnecting wires). It turned out that LabVIEW also calls the AdaptToInputs ability once, when the VIs are loaded and any single change is made, no matter if it touches the XNode or not. As I had many such non-optimal XNodes in many places, it was causing code regeneration in all of them. Besides of that some of my VIs had very high code complexity (11 to 13), because of a bunch of nested structures. When the XNodes regeneration was occurring simultaneously with the VIs recompilation, it was taking that a minute or so. After I added extra conditions into my AdaptToInputs ability (issue a GenerateCode reply only, when the Term Types are changed), the edits in my VIs started to take 1.5 seconds. Still the hierarchy saves can be slow, when some 'heavy' VIs are changed, but it's a task for me to refactor those VIs, so their complexity could decrease to 10 or less. By the way, my example from the previous page was not suitable for demonstrating the situation, as its code complexity is low and the Match Regular Expression XNode does not issue a GenerateCode reply in the AdaptToInputs.

I don't know what drivers are used under the hood, but I've recently used G-Audio to interface to the mic/speakers for a LabVIEW application I was working on.

I am also rocking version 4.2.0b1-1 for the same reasons.

This topic is repetitive. Please go here “Sequence Toolkit“ ”

Aren't DVR's just LabVIEW's take on pointers?

4. WinAPI version using ChooseColor function. NativeColors.rar Far from ideal, don't kick too hard. 🙂 Determine Clicked Array Element Index is from here.

I'm excited to release ViPER ViPER is an Object Oriented design Framework that supports dependency injection and recursive object creation. Systems are assembled at runtime from a collection of pre-built components defined by an Object Definition Document. Please visit the project on GitHub https://github.com/kurtafriday/ViPER I've presented this framework at several GLA Conferences, for an overview and guidance please view. GLA 2021 https://labviewwiki.org/wiki/GLA_Summit_2021/Open_Source_ViPER GLA 2020 https://labviewwiki.org/wiki/GLA_Summit_2020/ViPER_-_A_LabVIEW_Dependency_Injection_Framework This branch of ViPER has been used by us to develop systems in regulated industries for several years, it's solid and reliable, however its windows only. I'm working on ViPER_WinRT which is compatible with Windows and RT and we have already used it for several systems. I'll be releasing ViPER_WinRT in the coming months. I'll work to get ViPER onto the VIPM Tools Network soon. I'm looking forward to the feedback and I hope you enjoy and get value from this framework. Ping me if you have any questions. kurt@medulla.net

Well, yes and no and yes and maybe. It all depends on what you're trying to measure and what the system requirements are. And, of course, just because it's cheaper up front doesn't mean it's cheaper overall. If it costs $200 less but takes me 50 hours longer to implement then it costs more.

Regarding Levenshtein: Wladimir Levenshtein developed 1995 an algorithm for this. It is called the Levenshtein Distance. Some years ago I developed a VI to calculate the Levenshtein Distance. Here it is (LabVIEW 2016). Can you post your VIs in LV2020 or 2019, please. Levenshtein Distance.vi

Another VI I thought someone reading this forum thread might find helpful. This one calls the one I posted previously as a subVI. "Make Control Glow.vi" draws a fading rectangle behind the specified control. Save it and its subVI ("Offset Glow Rect.vi") to the same subdirectory. For example, here's a glow on a system OK button. Color and border thickness are parameterized. Saved in LV2020. Make Control Glow.vi Offset Glow Rect.vi

This seems to work... CRC16-CCITT-FALSE.vi

I don't have good examples to share, but here are a few helpful links for you: NI has an article dedicated to DVRs, which also explains the fundamental idea: http://www.ni.com/product-documentation/9386/en/ Here is a short video that explains how to use a DVR and some of the pitfalls: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIWzjnkqz1Q Of course, you'll find lots of topics related to DVRs on this forum.

Thanks Mads.

Hi all, sorry i had to do some other work. @ O_o: We already took a look into the UML editor from GOOP: The code is horrible. @drjdpowell: Thank you for your Picture and your inspiration. Up to now we try an other way. We will report if we found a solution. Thanks again Oliver

Hi All, I'm looking for a good resource that explains LabVIEW's Execution System / Thread Allocation / Thread Priority system. As a background to the reason for my request: I have an application with over 50 parallel loops running at fixed but configurable times. Twenty of these loops are calling a .net Dll and are thus not in a Timed Loop (there is a known issue according to NI support with calling a .net dll in a timed loop where the call time is large ie. upwards of a second). The remaining loops are performing other data acquisition. Each loop is what I call a Task Controller - it looks after a specific piece of hardware, taking requests for data (via queues), performing data acquisition and then pumping the result back to the requester. In order to seperate the timing of the functionality (and allow multiple requesters access to the same data), this process is not sequential but occurs in parallel loops. So there is a lot of parallel activity going on. I notice that as more of these loops fire up, the slower the remaining loops are. The CPU usage tends to stay around 7-8% during this time irrespective of how many loops are executing. Note that the .net dll calls (up to 20) are reasonably slow calls and each could take up to 6 seconds to execute. The .net dll has been written to handle multi-threading. The PC is a hyper-threaded quad core (ie 8 logical cores) @ 3.3GHz. Kinda a meaty machine. I should also mention that the majority of the VIs are re-entrant. The only non-rentrant VIs are some FGVs and a few User Interface VIs that reference the data in these FGVs. And before you ask the FGVs are simply Get/Set for a handful of cluster points. So I figure it's a simple case of thread starvation. Every VI is currently set to the Standard Execution System (via Same as Caller) with Normal Priority. I figure that adjusting these settings on the top level Task Controller vis may assist in spreading the load to the remaining available, but not executing, threads. The SubVIs under each Task Controller will continue to use the Same As Caller setting, allowing me to seperate logically each Task into appropriate Execution Systems. Any thoughts?

The configuration is contained in the *.ini file for the built application along with other properties such as vi server configuration. Here's an example of the content that updates the Other1 and Other2 execution systems maximum thread count for each priority. You can generate this programmatically as part of the application build spec with a Post-Built Action : ESys.other1.Normal = 20 ESys.other1.High = 20 ESys.other1.VHigh = 20 ESys.other1.TCritical = 20 ESys.other2.Normal = 20 ESys.other2.High = 20 ESys.other2.VHigh = 20 ESys.other2.TCritical = 20 Note that you could also just use the same property settings in your LabVIEW.ini file for the same effect in the development environment. I believe this is all threadconfig.vi actually does however it doesn't touch any application build specs (not that sophisticated I'm afraid). Here is a quick post build vi I cobbled together to generate the entries on every application build:

Start with NI's article "How Many Threads Does LabVIEW Allocate?" Also see the LabVIEW help for "Multitasking, Multithreading, and Multiprocessing." If you divide your code across execution systems instead of leaving them all at "Same as Caller" you should see the work distributed across more threads, and probably better performance and higher CPU use.

The OpenG Pipe Project does just that. It is a LabVIEW Library that replaces the System Exec function and returns pipe refnums for the three standard IO interfaces and functions to read and write to those refnums. The project hasn't been released yet as I consider it not entirely release quality but it does work for me and I have actually used in in several of my projects already. Since there is no officially released package yet you can't just download it through VIPM from internet. But here is a copy of a package you can install using VIPM. oglib_pipe-1.0-1.ogp

The candles are starting to flicker to life... I read that and immediately wondered why the first case causes a broken run arrow and the second doesn't. (Hey, it was in CAPS... it was easy to skip the preceeding sentences.) Then the word "object" in the PRTC context help hit me over the head. From my end user perspective, previous versions of Labview don't make a distinction between classes and objects. (For example, the To More Specific Class prim has 'Target Class' as an input that in reality accepts an object.) Despite my attempts to differentiate between the two when posting, in my head I often use the terms interchangably. I'll have to work hard to change my way of thinking. I'd give you more kudos if I could...

QUOTE(Tomi Maila @ Oct 30 2007, 01:34 AM) GetValueByPointer takes the C style pointer and the corresponding data type, which are generated by Import Shared Library Tool, as inputs and copies the value which the pointer points in shared library(dll/so/framework) to LabVIEW. Input terminals: Input Type: Input type is the LabVIEW data type to which you want to pass into LabVIEW. Input type can be Numeric, string, Array, Cluster . This VI returns an error if LabVIEW cannot convert the data wired to Pointer to the data type you wire to this input. If the data is integer, you can coerce the data to another numeric representation, such as an extended-precision, floating-point number. Pointer: Pointer is a memory address represented by a 32-bit unsigned integer in LabVIEW. Pack Type: Byte alignment information of the Input Type. Output terminals: Value:Value is the data copied from the memory which is pointed by Pointer and changed to the data type specified by Input type.