jgcode

I had a similar issue whereby after refactoring (I encapsulated part of the class into a Parent class for reuse) the PN caused a crash in the Run-Time but not Dev Environment. I ended up removing all Properties and staying clear of them. However, I like the new feature as it created a much cleaner BD.

Nice!

My back and I are back!

Great news!

you clearly missed some, mostly from february 2010 but also later. I reported them but not sure who gets those reports. I think I reported some of them already last year.

Hi Rolf

My post was in response Antoine's post dated 04-Mar-11 - I have not back tracked through the forums.

However, I just did a quick look and could not find any spam from Feb 2010 onwards as you mentioned above.

Also, I am just guessing that any reports would go to Jim?

Cheers

-JG

...(say, the "Select Class" menu when you pop up on a VI Server refnum control) are pretty intense -- both long and deeply nested...

Thank goodness for Quick Drop's VI Server Rename Plugin I say

OpenG is still suffering from a lot of spam

It's all cleaned up now.

My wife thinks Sean Connery is hot.

Does not look like there is any serial or Ethernet code there

We might be able to comment better if you are able to post more of what you have done and trying to do.

From chatting with some fellow LAVAers it seems the Statechart module does not get much love. But my collegue has used it quite effectively on multiple RT projects, usually for implementing control.

So I have/can see the benefits and it's something that I have not dived into but I am keen to, one day.

So, whilst I have not much to add, I too am interested on others experiences. One of the downsides is that it's another module to purchase so not everyone has access to it.

Cool post

Now your unexplained absence is, well... ...explained!! Congratulations!! :beer

I love when LAVAer's post about other members, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside... ...and today is no exception...

Congratulations to François Normandin for hitting 1000 posts!

Cheers to someone who has furthered my skills online and offline, and whom I had the pleasure of hanging around with at NI Week (did I mentioned he looks good in a kilt?).

Cheers

-JG

Ok, I decided to do my own benchmarking as I am interested in overhead.

I wanted to get a feel for the overhead.

SubVI has error-in, error-out wired straight through whilst Error is cased out and wired through.

Here is the results, took a small subset to post but data is pretty consistent IMO (can log more if I can be bothered).

What is interesting is LabVIEW 2010 is the opposite to all the others?

Anyways, seems pretty insignificant over 1M iterations.

Note: Data is in (ms).

Attached is the code if anyone else wants to see it.

LV82.zip

Code is in LabVIEW 8.2.1

Of course I could just cheat and have a version saved in the class data as well.

Yes, that is what I do. I currently un/flatten the class to/from disk in much the same way Michael describes (I actually developed the technique from copying stuff in an article Jim posted on thinkinging?) to solve the issue you present.

Also, on the darkside Dave/Jack/AQ instigated a great discussion on such issues with this - well worth a read. In summary, blindly trusting NI's implementation is not advised for mission critical stuff but it is the easiest way - but won't fix your issue methinks.

I'm not sure which VI you are talking about, but unsupported does not mean buggy.

I would disagree

I inherited some 7.1 code and upgraded to 2010. Legacy unsupported code (now using datasocket) returned incorrect tag values (haven't reported it yet, don't know if anyone would care tho).

Often in my code there are far more opportunities for parallelism by not making execution dependent on the error wire.

I don't see how thus point is a benefit of not wrapping: Functions\methods can be run in parallel and then the errors concatenated at the end. Just because they are wrapped does not mean they have to be serialized etc...

...Maybe I should explain in the comments that this is (mostly) pointless and refer the evaluators to this thread

I think this thread is still lacking evidence to say that wrapping VIs in an error cluster is 'pointless'. I think at the end of the day it comes down to a matter of style.

In this case you are sitting NI's exam with their marking system. Style is rated pretty high and it's pretty well known they use VI Analyzer to assist marking

...I just have code in place such that whenever I need to use the index, I first check if it's valid, and build it if necessary.

Cool thread.

To handle situations such as above, I do the checking at the time the object is read from disk.

Don't know if there are pros\cons between the two methods, or if it doesn't really matter.

Cheers

-JG

Yer, we use the same application.

Go Japan.

Hi tushar

Nice job. Are you able to comment as to why this framework would be better to use than e.g. the custom plugin feature of Quick Drop?

Cheers

-JG

You are not the only one

Ok, well if you can launch GSW programmatically that's cool (I never checked).

But I concur with Rolf (above) regarding your application.

Hi UnCLAD

If LabVIEW is configured to do so GSW will open when no other VI's FP are open (I.e. all closed).

Are you looking for a programmatic way to show GSW? I don't think that is possible. Maybe you could suggest it on the IE??

Scott

That is right, that issue does apply to both 8.2 and 8.6 implementations. But that is the limk I was referring to.

Cheers

-JG

Hi unCLAD

Not sure I can contribute any more as everything is mentioned above - you will need to close the FP in order for the GSW to appear.

Cheers

-JG