X___

The latest NI License Manager release page: https://www.ni.com/en-us/support/documentation/release-notes/product.license-manager.html will clarify all that:

It doesn't say much of what the expected position reshuffling is going to be, but based on past history, it it unlikely they will not change anything to the management and strategy. I don't anticipate a reboot of LabVIEW or doubling down on investment and renewal of hopes for the tool though.

Here is an example that shows how that works: https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Can-I-read-16-bit-PNG-files-with-LabVIEW/m-p/4296823#M1255119

Yes

You would have to add a dummy graph that you would only show the legend of and fill that with half of your plot names (e.g. adding one empty plot for each pair). And of course hide the legend of your original graph. And respond to actions on the dummy graph to update your original graph.

There is NO public bug tracker in LabVIEW... In fact, I am not even sure there is beta program anymore...

A bit like Egyptian hieroglyphs.

For NI's defense, this is probably only visible on 1080p displays. It speaks volume about the state of LabVIEW when this becomes a new feature worth discussion on LAVA...

OK, my bad. I think I know what you are referring to: I am not sure what this means though, as I see no effect of the default font style on terminal, bundle, etc. sizes, only on the labels (in LV 2021 SP1).

Care to expand? Don't see anything in the changelog (sorry, there is no changelog).

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3949487-national-instruments-sale-process-likely-to-be-completed-in-early-april-report

I am looking forward to reading "Undo doesn't work anymore" in 2024Q3 and "colors are all gone" in 2027Q5... 🍿🍹

Almost got me. I was certain it was blue.

For info, this showed up in a VIM, in which I was playing back and forth between the representation of the input data to check different cases. I guess it throws off the IDE context help... and maybe more.

No comments and couldn't care less whether it is fixed or not.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2023/03/10/who-will-win-the-bidding-war-for-national-instrume/

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ni-acquires-set-gmbh-accelerate-140000459.html

I am not the one confused by this post, but I have to wonder: with a 17 MB BD and a code complexity of 18.1, maybe considering breaking stuff into subVIs and refactoring is in order? In my case, this tool was helpful in setting priorities: https://www.abcdef.biz/pi_free.htm

I only meant that 2023 Q1 is the first version to officially support Windows 11 and that apparently, the head count in the LabVIEW R&D team is either classified or not to be admitted in public.

There is no need for gut feeling: the simple fact that they are not even trying to hype the future of LabVIEW is speaking volume. We implicitly learn that the LabVIEW team has been gutted or at least not given the means it needs to even keep in sync with OSes (https://www.ni.com/en-us/support/documentation/supplemental/22/ni-product-compatibility-for-microsoft-windows-11-.html). Heck, TestStand and VeriStand themselves, of which I know nothing but understand are where NI is investing its resources, are not Windows 11 ready. As for the rest, I guess you can check the release notes for 2023 Q1 (https://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/labview-2023-q1-and-drivers.html#examples) to understand that the T's are not even crossed anymore, since the examples for this version are apparently to be found in the \LabVIEW 2022\examples directory... I am not sure it is fun to work at SpaceX, but I doubt there is much feeling of exhilaration at LabVIEW R&D nowadays...

And the saga continues... https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/national-instruments-picks-fortive-keysight-challengers-emersons-bid-sources-2023-03-03/

Seriously: it's over (it actually starts at 54 mins in).

My bad, it does not scramble elements 😞 Busy on the side dealing with a lab flood doesn't help with focus...

Well, you are sorting the array before removing the elements to filter. If I don't care about the array order, I can use a set, which should to things quicker by design.

This is messing up with the elements order in the original array though