jgcode

It's when you are in the Full Editor that you cannot see the history.

I think is due to the subroutine priority setting - the loops must not be able to run in parallel, therefore the VI is as currently as fast as we can make it (it acts the same as if those loops were run serially). Therefore, if memory is an issue, I challenge anyone out there to optimise it but retain speed

But wouldn't you want to reuse your parent constructors in your child constructors (most of the time)? Having that Class Input allows that.

I prefixed my statement with "guessing" to cover me in case I was wrong - I guess it worked!

I am just guessing but I think Tim_S means attending the Object-Orientated Design and Programming in LabVIEW Course.

Additional to the Table Name, I think we should add sufficient BD documentation so that it is clear how the table was generated.

Sorted

I think I can help with that - stay tuned. Here, here

Cool.

OpenG accepts all types of re-use components as possible submissions. Crelf is correct (when is the man ever wrong?), it would be distributed by function-type (or part of an API) not by component-type (e.g. an X-controls only package).

Yes, my comment was also based on the fact the snippet posted was in 2010. DVR's came out on 2009 - was there improvements in 2010 etc? (I ask coz I haven't use 2010 much).

I agree with Neil here - I would start by learning encapsulation before moving onto inheritence and polymorphism. I learnt LVOOP by starting to use it in my projects for encapsulation, replacing code I would have otherwise passed around as clusters. I also worked through the shipping examples - they were helpful too.

I am really excited how well this process has turned out and thank everyone who participated. I will be changing the status to pending in the near future so anyone who missed out can still respond. After that I will lock the topic and integrate the code for an upcoming release.

Good call. I sometimes find myself opening two tabs so I can do the above.

Wouldn't DVR's and IPE be better suited to this task (i.e. easier).

Here are the relative times after I integrated this VI into the test framework. Very impressive speed increase. IMHO I don't think the obfuscation warrants not implementing it, we can add comments on the BD (your description above made enough sense to me to understand it straight away) and we can even made a support VI which creates the lookup and save that. So the question is - can anyone make it faster?

As a side note we did that on the OpenG 4.x release to e.g. update a link to the new palette folder in some.ogp files. It worked just fine (and we had to do it this way rather than repackage for some other reasons).

The reason for the Class input terminal is so that a Child may call the Parent's Constructor as e.g. part of it's Constructor. It is not a Dynamic Dispatch input, but rather a Static input however, as it is LVOOP a Child will be passed out of the Parent's Constructor method if one is wired in.

Note to all: it is more helpful to post VIs to this thread than snippets as CP and VI settings are lost. Nice one! - Yes ,the Lexical Class primitive is faster at searching than the Search Array primitive in this case. Below is the new proposed version. We will add you to the copyright for your contribution. Please post here or PM me your full name (or company name) and email address which is required for copyright. Trim New time is from VI above. Trim Whitespace NEW.vi I created a VI from Darin's snippet and tested it in the performance framework to get the above times: Trim Whitespace.zip

Ha - just making sure you are all paying attention Cheers! On the contrary, I like to code the index in the bottom LHS and the condition in the bottom RHS. However, I did try to do less bends on the last bit of code for you This is inline with original OpenG version. Trim Whitespace.zip

Cool. Firefox has some great add-ins some for web-development but I use Chrome exclusively because I just find it so fast (I view a lot of media in my browser). I have never really dug into Opera, maybe I should check it out more. Like you I gave up on IE a while ago too... lol.

I am very happy you activated this - I love it!

Ok, so this is an update of the VI based on the above. Is everyone happy (e.g. this is the most optimized version for common use case). These are the relative times (note: Time New and Trim Whitespace+ are now the same BD): Trim Whitespace.zip

I took François to mean that i.e. new version of the same package (therefore, new package). This is an example of the options:

Hi David If interested, there is another thread running here that discusses mobile browsers and the new site. By the way, there seems to be a few people who prefer Opera. I use it for only when testing to check web page compatibly - but prefer Chrome for everything else (or forced to use Safari on iPhone). Why do people like using it? Cheers -JG