Yair

I'm fairly sure there isn't a mechanism for commenting in the config file VIs, but since everything is pure G, you could create your own copy and implement it yourself, if you really want it. Another option is to add comments as separate lines near the lines they're commenting on.

Good idea. You should probably submit it through the product suggestion center. If I remember correctly, someone posted an Xnode which does this, but you can also create a simple LV2 global to do this - input the array and a boolean reset input and just build the array inside the subVI. Not as efficient memory-wise, but makes the diagram cleaner.

Congratulations. :thumbup:

I haven't looked into this for the 180x, but you should note that your actual acquisition rate will probably be determined by the AI module rate + the time it takes the cFP to poll all its modules + the communication time, which means I doubt you'll be able to get up to 10khz. You shouldn't have a problem with having separate loops, since you just have a different IP address for each device and can talk to them like that. It really as simple as buying a simple router or hub and connecting both modules and your computer to it so that they are in the same network. However, if you want high speed, relatively cheap DAQ and you don't NEED the network connectivity, I think compactDAQ might be what you want, but I don't have any experience with it.

QUOTE(LV Punk @ Sep 24 2007, 04:57 PM) That's interesting. I also saw one of the local NI reps trying to demo VR in Vista in a convention last year and failing magnificently. It was probably the same presentation.

Is LAVA trying to tell me something?

My guess would be that it's in your spam folder (look for "unknown sender", might be different in your mail client). It's been a long time since I registered, but that's how I get the reply notifications.

I can't tell you why it WAS created, but I can tell you of some of the differences: The most important difference is that the general level is more advanced. The NI forums have some very advanced users, but the LabVIEW board gets about 200-300 posts a day, most of which are junk from newbies. Here the SNR is a lot higher. Thus, most LAVA regulars probably don't follow the NI forums at all. Second, the board is independent, which allows to host some things which NI would not host (or at least did not, I didn't see them deleting some of the more recent ones). For example, posts about technology which NI would rather not make officially public. Third, since it's not run by a big company, it's much more agile and can adapt new technologies and options much more easily. But, as I said, announcing cross posting should have nothing to do with whether or not people frequent the same forums. It is simply meant to allow people to go to the other thread to see any relevant developments and save themselves time.

Oops, I had a rather busy week and it seems like more than 6 days since I made that remark. The thing is that this is a serious usability issue. It's not as obvious now because most threads don't get to be more than a single page. Maybe we should just limit threads to 15 posts? I mean, if you haven't said it in 15 posts, it's probably not worth saying, right? Or maybe I should just change my settings to work with 50 posts a page?

Still not working for threads with more than a single page.

QUOTE(Aristos Queue @ Sep 22 2007, 06:59 AM) Hopefully they will be in some future version.

QUOTE(Paul_at_Lowell @ Sep 22 2007, 01:42 AM) If I understand you correctly, there is a better way - ditch the shared variable, create a Stop Door method (VI) and simply call that VI on all instances when the user presses the stop button. That's the point of OO. P.S. It doesn't have to be a Stop Door VI, it might be Change Door State or something similar.

Welcome to LAVA. Someone who's willing to search first is always someone we're happy to have. :thumbup: QUOTE(watcher @ Sep 21 2007, 04:43 PM) This is probably the thing which will improve your LV skills more than anything and you should probably start with that the earliest you can. At most, if you're wrong, someone will correct you (actually, it's worse if you're wrong and someone does not correct you, but that does not usually happen). As Ben mentioned, I also suggest you start with that at the NI forums, simply because there are a lot more easy questions there which you will be able to answer correctly.

Cross post. Daniel, it's worth mentioning cross posting to avoid having people do duplicate work.

I didn't understand what it is you actually want to do, so I can't provide a specific answer, but I will mention a few points. Also, I only have experience with older versions of the PDA module. I assume the touch module is similar, but there may be differences. In any case, you should test any solution you come up with on that module before implementing it, because you might find out that certain things don't work. References might not work as you expect. It might be advisable to change the mechanical action to Switch Until Released and use the Value Change event instead, but make sure the proper action is supported. You will probably be able to get a Mouse Down event if you use a picture control instead of a boolean. Don't use Mouse Down and Mouse Down? in the same event structure. It's ambiguous. Choose one of them.

It doesn't look that bad to me. I mean, yes, it probably could be improved, but the style looks reasonable and to be honest, which piece of code can't be tweaked and improved? My understanding was that NXT has some performance issues which need to be taken into consideration. For all I know, this might be the most efficient way.

QUOTE(Ben @ Sep 19 2007, 07:41 PM) Isn't that code encapsulated in a reentrant VI? Or, at the very least, in 8 file copies of the same VI?

I think the major advantage is when you want to add meta data to an object which can be identified by reference. An example would be a service which would handle window resizing - you could embed data into each object which would tell it how to behave when the window is resized. The biggest disadvatage is that tags are not supported. For that reason alone I would not use them in my production code. QUOTE(mike_nrao @ Sep 19 2007, 04:37 PM) I don't think it's a mystery. Most likely, the profile window simply doesn't count them. The profiler isn't fully accurate anyway.

Yes, I follow that as well and the Excel date story was my favorite so far, although there were some others I liked to and there's also an entire book there about GUI design.

OK, now it's working fine in threads where there is a single page but it takes you to the top of the last page if there is more than a single page. I'm starting to feel like I'm on a rollercoaster.

Welcome to LAVA and congratulations. Hopefully we'll be seeing you in Israel soon...

QUOTE(Justin Goeres @ Sep 12 2007, 04:17 PM) Actually, I'm fairly sure you aren't the last ones to learn this.After Darren presented this session at NIWeek, both of us said that we were actually thinking (even before the presentation) of doing a nugget about this behavior. I guess Darren is more of a gentleman than I am, since I still have it in my list and I guess that means we decided that I would do it, but I didn't get around to it yet. Anyone else who wants to can do it instead.Of course, Justin, you would have to follow the NI forums to see those nuggets. :PBTW, this is also considerably better than the array size method because it will take into consideration all the indexing inputs of a for loop.

QUOTE(Jim Kring @ Sep 14 2007, 12:22 AM) Plus, with a string constant you can't double click an empty space in the diagram and then start typing, which is something you can do with a standard comment if you use the auto tool.

I haven't tried LV specifically, but my own experience with touch screens was that they're usually not suitable for the precise click & drag type operation you need to use LV. If you want some more answers, try reading this.

QUOTE(Jim Kring @ Sep 12 2007, 07:36 PM) No. I would be extremely happy if LV knew how to manage all the VIs\libraries\classes\contols\etc. on its own without the need for creating files for them and managing those files. Granted, there would be many many problems to solve (e.g. backward compatibility, DB corruption, SCC integration, code distribution), but it sounds like a potentially great solution to many problems.