Jump to content

X___

Members
  • Posts

    280
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

X___ last won the day on April 29

X___ had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2019
  • Since
    1995

Recent Profile Visitors

3,703 profile views

X___'s Achievements

Enthusiast

Enthusiast (6/14)

  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Dedicated Rare

Recent Badges

66

Reputation

  1. Probably not the first one and most likely not the last?
  2. From the link above: LabVIEW is now third party software for NI? Kind of consistent though with making it its own independent product line, the survival of which will be justified by number of annual licensed paid for...
  3. The software subscription model is the future...says this article of 2013 I wonder whether NI has any idea of the "churn rate" discussed there. I guess the first year will give them a clue. I also wonder whether the same brain who made the NI logo become a green deflated ..NI. is at the origin of this marketing decision? And is now gone, after having made wonders.
  4. It turns out that this was a classic case of a spawned VI and orphaned references (and after all, swapping my VI for the 3-button dialog did not change the pattern, although it improved the look), even though I am not quite sure this all makes sense to me... But anyway, the bottom line is that I managed to circumvent the problem by keeping some references alive in a hidden launcher VI which shuts down when no more windows are left open.
  5. I listened with interest to this presentation by Wiebe Walstra: https://labviewwiki.org/wiki/GLA_Summit_2020/A_By-value_OpenCV_Library Does anyone know what the status of this is?
  6. Just reflecting on what some not-to-be-named companies have accustomed us with... But in answer to your question, if you have irreversible actions taking places (that would be the case in the type of stuff I do, which is mostly computational when it is not DAQ - I don't suppose you want to undo drilling or cutting physical parts 🙂, clearly you need to store intermediates states to be able to backtrack to those and since juggling between different cases might be tricky. this might be your best approach... And since even the not-to-be-named company has been unable to find a satisfactory solution despite their elite team of programmers after 20 years (not mentioning that there is no undo in tons of locations in the IDE), this is clearly not a trivial problem. But that might be one sentence too much. Hold on, Musk hasn't bought that site yet, has it?
  7. I'd just pop up a dialog with a "Please contact our company's support channel and Idea Exchange forum to discuss or request implementation of this feature. Reminder: access to future improvements of our software is reserved to continuing subscribers. Other cheaper and more powerful alternatives may be available".
  8. Nope. The CORE.vi was called by the 3-buttons dialog VI (the "white" version of the CORE.vi, i.e. a wrapper to the CORE.vi), itself called from a dynamically launched VI. As I said, a pared down test version of the program was working just fine (which is why I was not able to post such an example). I guess I must be getting old, as I have decided to move on without fully understanding what was going on, having solved this issue with a custom dialog VI. This being said, if someone can recreate a situation such as illustrated in my original post (a non-reentrant stopped VI whose icon in a calling (stuck) subVI being debugged shows the "green" arrow), maybe we'll get closer to figuring out what was going on (no need to focus on the CORE.vi).
  9. Still don't get how this is my answer, in particular to the "running VI arrow" in the calling VI and the stopped CORE.vi question. I think I do remember indeed that putting a breakpoint in the CORE.vi and stepping through it might have prevented it from "aborting" (for lack of a better understanding of what is happening), but then, when that CORE.vi is/was called from within the main VI, things were working fine, so it doesn't really explain anything for me. But to some extent, this doesn't matter anymore at this point.
  10. Follow-up: replacing the 3-button dialog window with my own (working in essentially the same way, if a bit cleaner) solves the issue (for now). I still would like to understand what happened with this VI...
  11. I am discussing run time behavior. I am not editing the 3-dialog button VI. The snapshot I showed is the end result of the app running (and getting stuck). The FP of that dialog window opens up via an invoke node in that dialog VI (the first part is formatting, as I mentioned in the previous post - the VI can be checked in vi.lib), and then there is a simple event loop that waits for a button click, which ends the execution and closes the VI. So when that dialog VI is reached in my Notebook VI (at the green arrow location in the original post), the dialog VI executes, formats itself, opens its window, and by some magic, quits the event loop without a click and doesn't close the window. I have put error indicators in that 3-dialog CORE VI to check whether any error was generated, but couldn't see any, which makes that (putative) behavior so puzzling to me.
  12. I had to read this to learn something new (about bugs and wasps): http://www.labviewcraftsmen.com/blog/the-root-loop However that post says that the 3-button dialog (which I am using) does not require to run in the root loop... I generally write my own dialogs, but this one is convenient (although style-wise, pretty dated) because of all its fancy formatting. I'll try with my own regardless, just for verification purpose.
  13. I am staring at this: which shows a snapshot of 3 VIs, two of them being in vi.lib/Utility/error.lib VIs (visible FP), the other one being a subVI in a library of mine. The snapshot illustrates the puzzling situation that I am encountering: Three Button Dialog.vi, whose state is idle as is clear from the snapshot (but is also confirmed by the LabVIEW Task Manager), is however "running" as indicated by the green arrow in the calling VI (whose BD is shown in the back). The "Close Notebook Dialog Window" is nothing but the Three Button Dialog CORE.vi of the error.lib library, and is also idle. In other words, the calling subVI is never stepping out of this situation and the only way for me to recover is to abort the VI. Question: how is THIS even possible? Background information: First of all, I wished I could boil this down to a simple example that I could share, but I haven't been able to reproduce this yet in a bare bone project. Now, the weird thing is that this situation occurred after what I thought would be a simple refactoring of my application, namely dynamically launching my consumer loop, which itself launches the Notebook VI whose subVI is now unresponsive. Before: Main launches Notebook dynamically. User closes Main. Only Notebook remains live. User clicks Notebook's "close box" which call the 3-button dialog. User clicks "No", Notebook closes. After: Main launches Consumer loop VI dynamically. Consumer opens Notebook dynamically. User closes Main which sends a "Quit" message to the Consumer loop, shutting it down. Only Notebook remains live. User clicks Notebook's "close box" which call the 3-button dialog 3-button dialog is idle, Notebook is stuck waiting for it to finish. Something is going on (or rather is not). What could it be? LabVIEW 2021 SP1 64-bit Windows 10 Edit: I forgot to mention that none of the VIs above are re-entrant and that the 3-button dialog CORE.vi is supposed to run as a modal window.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.