Yair

Just in case you don't know, you can use the scroll wheel to scroll horizontally, but you have to place on the cursor on the horizontal scrollbar for it to work. Many programs allow free panning (similar to the grabbing hand) if you press the scroll wheel down - you push it down and then moving the mouse scrolls the page you're on in any direction - this could be really useful with a 2D environment like LV.

Seems to work fine in 7.0. You have to make sure that you enable the VI server's remote access in the executable (Options menu or INI settings) and that you give each executable a unique port number. Then, you need to wire 'Localhost' into the machine name input of "Open Application Reference" and the correct port number. Lastly, you need to remember to wire the application refnum from your Open function into every VI which will need it (like Open VI reference).

I don't know about shared variables, but I assume you should be able to do this through VI server by getting a reference to a control and using the Value (signaling) property.

I see you invoked Kring's law by mentioning the beer first. :beer: You win your own thread.

Yes, but why is it always around 13.5% which aren't moved? I assume this is because of some property of the random number generator which I don't feel like testing at the moment. Neither would I. Oh... I already did... However, since time is bidirectional (or is it quasi-directional? ), let's pretend I didn't do that yet.

I know, only in this case, using the third method in 7.0 with an array of 10,000 elements leaves 1300-1400 of the elements in their original locations, which is a rather large margin of error (13 percent). Since this method is based on the random number generator and the number is around this range every time I run the VI it seems reasonable to assume that this is a property of the random number generation which is reflected through using this method. The method suggested by Guenther is fast, random and elegant and appears to be the best solution. Download File:post-1431-1145547234.vi

Nice. I actually figured out the shuffle way as well, but the main problem with both methods is that they're only "quasi random" (they have an inherent order) and a cryptographer friend of mine told me once that these kinds of methods are not considered good enough for cryptography. For other purposes, however, they should be good enough (especially if memory allocation is in mind) and I will try to remember the second one.

Efficient how? Memory? Speed? I don't think there is any way to do this without using 2 array buffers (one for the input and one for the output), which is what you're doing. I think LV might be clever enough in its newer versions to detect that you're not actually doing anything with the top array and will probably reuse its buffer. Other than this method (which should only be a problem when handling large arrays), the only viable method I can think of would be passing the array to a DLL with an efficient C algorithm, but I'm not sure the overhead will justify it.

That seems to be running with execution highlighting! A prime example of a cool Goldberg machine is Honda's Cog ad where they ransacked 2 Accords to make a two minute long machine with a cool line at the end. Then of course, there are the various "Incredible Machine" games. :worship:

The origin property now belongs to the panes and not to the FP.

Kurt wins. :beer:

I know of NI's control and their TOU. Ben made it sound as if there were specific fairly recent instances where he was censored and I'm wondering what those were.

This is apparently caused by LV implementing its own clipboard (you can see it in the hierarchy window if you copied some VIs into it). This would mean that LV has to keep its clipboard synchronized with the windows one and apparently it has a problem doing that. It seems LV R&D are aware of this.

Isn't the 3D picture control ActiveX (windows only)? And isn't it quite buggy (by your own account)? I guess that means we'll have to wait until Michael is prover right before we see a proper working 3D version. :clock:

How about this?

Nice work. I'm also in favor of unlocking the diagram (even if the code doesn't look that great ) and I would also suggest making the window much smaller. It should preferably be only the replace button with the option of getting to an options menu.

No real point, just to provide some more info about these (and to show that they didn't fly under the radar for some people. The BreakPoint is also a fun place).

Well, just in case y'all was wondering, these were originally introduced here.

The diagram disable structure has actually been around since at least 7.0 and could be created by using the New VI Object primitive (scripting only) which comes ready with an enum of all the possible objects.

Too many negations...Good luck. If you come up with a cool example, please upload it. It might give people ideas.

You can't rotate objects and you can't modify objects programmatically. Practically speaking, there are several ways to get more-or-less dynamic UIs - Subpanels Picture Rings Hidden controls, controlled through Visible properties XControls? Picture Control The last one is the only one which will allow you to have a truly dynamic UI, but that would require that you do everything yourself. If you want some examples, go to this thread.

I don't understand why all of you are making fun of Alfa. Time can go in reverse and it's very easy to prove it if you have LabVIEW. Just have a look at the attached VI. Kind of reminds me of Heinlein's "Waldo"... Download File:post-1431-1144233538.vi

Make sure you have mass compiled your LV directory (there is a tool Jim Kring posted here to make this go much faster) and that you save whatever code you load before you run it.

You're starting to sound like Alfa. BTW, what specifically are you refering to in "being censored one too many times"? Michael, yes, it was a very clever hoax and I see the humor in it, it's just that I wouldn't have found it funny in real time even if I had figured it out - some things are no laughing matter.

It's quite possible that I'm not the only one who tends to believe people, especially when they bring bad news. You need to remember that we (at least some of us) don't know you personally, we don't know the exact nature of the relationship between you and Jim (for instance, why do you post a question instead of asking around the office first?), we don't know exactly how much of an effort it is to maintain this site or how much it costs and we do know that NI does have a tendency to take over competitors. Just remember how Ben Bailey explained his views here and then did come to a compromise with NI. I don't know how the MCC situation turned out, but these things do happen. You're right that there were some dead give-aways, but as I said, people tend to believe bad news. Also, people don't always "think". Sometime they just react as they hear something. I can say that my first reaction was "O.K., that's bad. How do I get the most out of this?". Only later came thoughts about the other meanings. I will just say again: "That's not funny!". The use of NI personnel participance was a good point, though.