ShaunR

There is no automatic garbage collector. It's an AQ meme that he used to rage about it.

Indeed. It's not a full solution as it doesn't support multiple streams, audio or other encoding types. But if you want to get the audio then you need to add the decoding case (parse is the nomenclature used here) for the audio packets in the read payload case structure.

IIRC there are a couple of RTSP libs for around (a while ago now). Some are based on using the VLC DLL's and I even saw one that was pure LabVIEW. Might be worth having a look at them for "inspiration".

Makes sense. It just goes to show how ingrained workflows are and little things can trip you up. I was right-clicking over the N, over the I. Right clicking 2 pixels down/up from the edge. Top edge, bottom edge, left right.

Probably not the feedback you are expecting but we really should do something about the nasty root loop API calls in the input API. I have somewhat progressed with this over the years and have the windows stuff all working for mouse and keyboard (and a little of the Linux) but I don't have a Mac so can't do anything on that. If there is some interest then let me know and I will see if I can allocate time to getting an API together.

It's not April yet so I must have missed a memo somewhere. How do I get For Loop conditional terminal back?

The boolean basically does:

I have similar problems now and again but it's not VIM's. Some things to try to sniff out the problem: Check project files and lvlibs with a text editor. If you have full file paths then that's a problem. File paths should be relative BUT! LabVIEW cannot always use a relative path (for example if it's on a network, different drives et.al.) Sometimes LabVIEW also gets confused but you need all paths to be relative even if it means reorganising how you structure your files. Do the above and put all dependencies in VI.lib. If you are using source control, checkout dependencies to the VI.lib directory, not your own file organisational preferences (some people like to have them on a different drive, for example). The litmus test for this is that you should be able to move your project to different locations without getting the VI searching dialogue. The search will invariably put a full path in when it finds the file-don't let it. Recursion breaks the project conflict resolution. If you have recursive functions, make sure they are not broken by manual isepction. The usual symptom is that there are no errors in the error dialogue but conflicts exist and VI's are broken somewhere. Polymorphic VI's hate recursion. If you are using polymorphic VI's recursively, don't use the polymorphic container (the thing that gives you the drop-down selector)! Only use polymorphic VI's as interfaces to other code - not itself. If you are using the polymorphic VI recursively then use the actual VI not the polymorphic container. If something gets broken you will go round in circles never getting to the broken code and multiple things will be broken.

Nice. If you replace the OpenG VI with the above then we don't need to install all those dependencies for your demo What do you expect the cancellation behviour to be? Press escape while holding the mouse down? Mouse up cancels unless the dragged window is outside the main window? Both? Something else? I wouldn't want this feature to be a "framework" though. It would need to be much easier than that. Maybe a VI that accepts control references and it just works like above on those controls?

You are probably getting a permissions error on the Open (windows doesn't ordinarily allow writing "c:") which will yield a null refnum and an err 8 on the open. Your err 5000 becomes a noop as does the write. You're then clearing that error so when you come to close the null refnum it complains it's an invalid parameter - equivalent to the following. Is it expected behaviour? Yes. Should it report a different error code? Maybe.

Faster execution than scripting. Scripting is incredibly slow.

Well. You could get it from the file. It's under the block diagram heap (BDHP) which is a very old structure. I personally wouldn't bother for the reasons I stated earlier but it would be much faster than using scripting.

Yes. This is exactly what is required. The User32 problem can be resolved either with file path comparison (which you stated earlier) or a list of known DLL names. I could think of a few more ways to make it automatic but I would lean to the latter as the developer could add to the list in unforeseen edge cases. The former might just break the build with no recourse. You seem to have added that for no apparent reason, from what I can tell.

This is the same as naming a DLL x32 or x64 with extra steps. You are now adding a naming convention to a read linker and a modify linker. It's getting worse, not better.

That doesn't help you with user32.dll.