X___

Then I am completely convinced that I have nothing to add to that discussion (which I guess was the purpose of this enlightening statement).

Thanks, this perfectly clarifies the matter. Nihil novi sub sole?

Am I reading this right?

It's a start. Humor and the recognition that the world is moving on outside the ivory tower...

It is a different product. It's like if a car company messed up some component and said: sorry, we fixed it the new model. But, hey no ill intent here, just a business model.

It's like moving the Expression Node back in some subpalette of the Mathematics functions that is not existing in the Base LabVIEW version (https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Expression-Node/td-p/3974820). Completely uncalled for, but, hey, AQ doesn't think that text-based mathematics should even be allowed in LV, so what do we know?

Can't use it with 64-bit LV, AFAIK...

Actually, the nipkg.ini is in \ProgramData\National Instruments\NI Package Manager\Settings\nipkg.ini

Can't get that to work systematically. Sometimes it does the trick, sometimes it doesn't. I believe this is worth reporting as a bug. While this could be a wrong hunch, I wonder whether this might be due to the narrow scrollbar width in the NXG graph legend. Notice that it is narrower than that of a NXG array (shown on the right below). It is definitely narrower than that of the silver style graph legend (shown second from the top left), which is narrower than the modern graph legend (shown last on the left). The latter is of the same width as the classic graph legend. The reason I am suspecting this is that I have seen something similar in a utility that was supposed to return the clicked element in an array (https://forums.ni.com/t5/Example-Code/Determine-Clicked-Array-Element-Index-in-LabVIEW/tac-p/4040339/highlight/true#M14360) and failed with silver and NXG arrays because the border sizes and other details of controls have changed from style to style, and the underlying routines have not been updated. In any case, this is annoying enough to be reported.

That was a trick question.

OK. What is the idea of password protecting those CLN and not, say, those in the Analysis VIs. Are we at risk of blowing up the planet?

Are you sure of that? The hierarchy shows System Exec call, so it might be even cruder than a .NET call indeed:

The NI_Unzip.lvlib VIs are all password protected (probably because underneath, they are using some .NET calls they don't want people to mess up with). So yes we don't know what they do, although the help tells us what they can't do: Unzips the contents of Zip file to the Target directory. Set Preview only? to TRUE to preview the list of files in Zip file before you unzip the zip file. This VI cannot unzip a zip file that is password protected. Why wouldn't it support password protected archives? Anyway, the compression/decompression algorithms are not necessarily particularly well described or unique for that matter and it is therefore not surprising that some implementations might be incompatible (although they shouldn't): .NET documentation https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.io.compression.deflatestream?view=netcore-3.1 An old 40,000 ft description: https://zlib.net/feldspar.html quoted in this interesting "from-the-ground-up" implementation (quoting the previous reference): http://www.integpg.com/deflate-compression-algorithm/

It does seem to do exactly what I needed though, which was emulate that piece of MATLAB code: zipbuf = fread(fid, offset, 'uint8=>uint8'); tmp_dir= tempname; [SUCCESS,MESSAGE] = mkdir(tmp_dir); if SUCCESS fnz= fullfile(tmp_dir,'temp.zip'); else disp(MESSAGE); error('Cannot create folder.') end tmp_fid = fopen(fnz,'w'); fwrite(tmp_fid, zipbuf); status = fclose(tmp_fid); fnu=char(unzip(fnz,tmp_dir) ); tmp_fid = fopen(fnu, 'r'); data = fread(tmp_fid, length, type_str); status = fclose(tmp_fid); [SUCCESS,MESSAGE] = rmdir(tmp_dir, 's'); if ~SUCCESS disp(MESSAGE); error('Cannot delete folder.') end end

A simpler way might be to do this using native LV functions: Of course you need to create two temporary files, but this is year 2020...