ShaunR

Labview 2011 ships with http vis. Alternatively there is an old openG set of VIs which work really well if the answer to your datasocket issue (which I never use) turns out to be impossible.

What issue? Getting clones?

The LabVIEW Task Manager may do what you need

Why do you need their paths? The open VI reference accepts the VI name (if it is in memory).

That is just the youtube limits. Search youtube for "The Trap" to see the rest (the original was one hour and that was 1 of 6 on youtube). In addition to the video being a part of a longer one . It, itself, was one of three, hour long, programs.The first one (of which you have seen a bit), examines the theories of John Nash and Laing as people being suspicious, self interested beings and the adoption of his theories and models by economists. The others discuss what our Chicago friends did with it, how we reacted to it and (IMO) much of the reason why the world is the way it is today. The three parts (if you are interested) are: F*ck You Buddy The Lonely Robot We will force you to be free.

Yeah.. Well....You can blame game theory for that!.

\resource\plugins\utilities\IfDef.llb\SetSymbols.vi/GetSymbols.vi and the conditional disable structure does pretty much everything.

<mounts soap-box> Indeed. They are all amoral (as an entity). There is no conscience. No guilt. No compassion. No moral obligation to "do the right thing" or indeed any sort of social contract toward community outside those imposed by law. Whilst the beings that constitute the corporate entity may have all these;in itself, it has only one objective - to increase it's market share towards a monopoly via the vehicle of profit. The Victorians knew this. That is why they made a definitive distinction between corporate and social. The banks were the guardians of corporate. The government, the guardian of the social. The govt kept the banks in line with laws, and the people kept the government in line with votes. What happens when corporate merges with government? Either the corporations MAKE the laws and your/our vote is worth as much as chocolate fire-guard, or we all start calling each other "comrade" and espouse the merits of the mother-land. <climbs back off the soap-box>

The technology to sort and segregate trash has been around a long time (even recycling tyers). But why spend shareholders investments on machines when you can get the peasants to do it for free

I'm not quite with you on this one.The storage would be a part of the calculator AE and there would be no "pesudo FGV". FGV stands for "Functional Global Variable and the functions would be +/- which is why I don't really discriminate between a "Get/Set FGV" and an AE. As long as the functions are atomic, then the +/- FGV would complete its operation (read the value, operate on it, then output) and the other operation could not read the stored value whilst this is happening (as it can with Globals). The race condition that FGVs address is that the value cannot be read in other parts of the code until the current function has completed. So in your example, the result of 2+2-1 (with two VIs in parallel) will always be 3 once both have been executed. With a global it could be 5. Your example, however, uses functions which are commutative. So when you lay down your Calc VIs and do an add and subtract in parallel. You cannot guarantee which of the VIs will be executed first by LabVIEW, but, after they both have executed, the answer will be correct. If the order is important (i.e. the operations are not commutative) then you have a different type of race condition that has nothing to do with access timing to the underlying stored value (which is what globals suffer from). However. unlike globals, FGVs have an error terminal, so if it sequence is important, they can be sequenced via the terminals (e.g add then subtract).

UDP was quite extensively covered recently here. You can also download transport.lvlib which handles variable length UDP datagrams.

The singleton pattern is a method to resolve a common problem associated with OOP when a single object is required to be instantiated and referenced rather than a new instance of an object (the default OOP instantiation-Grandma loves sucking eggs). Native LV does the opposite by default (a VI is a singleton - a single object referenced wherever it is placed - system wide). No design pattern is required as it is implicit to the language. If you don't want this behaviour, then it can be set to "re-entrant". This aspect, however is a side-show when talking about FGVs vs Globals. Where the differences between FGVs, globals really lie is in "State" not "Data". In non-data flow languages state has to be managed and an answer to the icky state management problem was OOP. In the dataflow paradigm, state is implicit in the language. However. Sometimes state managed by the [LabVIEW] language is not sufficient or appropriate. So, when it is advantageous to do so, we specifically design an object to store state (a FGV). The "get/set version of pseudo FGV" [sic] or "Action Engine" is the native labview method of replicating OOP style objects where you encapsulate the state of the data and manipulate it with methods. Global variables cannot maintain state (only data). Neither can they be "sequenced" to maintain state via dataflow. This is the advantage of FGV over globals. Singleton behaviour is just the language specific being taken advantage of.

Well. There was a Windows Kernel update just shy of 1 month ago, but no virus scanner update for 2 months. I noticed that windows defender AND the the separate virus scanners real-time scanning is enabled on all of them. So I've turned off "real-time" checking and Defender on the PCs temporarily to see if it goes away. There are various murmurs around the internet on this subject and the usual response is "just live with it" (not acceptable for me!).

Nicely explained by Rolf (including the caveats). The way I "protect" myself from getting pushed into the corner is to have a few choice buttons or a keyboard combination that brings up a password protected interface (can either be an "Admin" area or just completely hidden until a certain key combination is pressed). Once in, I usually give the options to return to the windows shell (requires reboot), start an explorer window (only way to look at files) and re-enable CTRL+ALT+DLT (last two don't require rebooting).. Just booting into LabVIEW as the shell will usually flummox most operators/users. Disabling CTRL+ALT+DEL means that you can't get to task manager, from which, you can use the run command.

My favourite trick is booting into the LV program as the shell and disabling CTRL+ALT+DEL .

Completely dissimilar machines. One has an 450GB SSD (laptop), one has a 500GB seagate (desktop), one has a 750GB Western Digital (Desktop) one has a 120GB WesternDigital (laptop). Mixtures of Win7/LabVIEW x32 and x64 and I7, I5 and Dual Core Pentiums (dissimilar hardware). I have a suspicion it is a Windows update or maybe virus scanner update (since all LabVIEW installations are over 8 months old)

Recently (I would say in the last month or so) I've been getting this strange error from the IDE when opening projects and vis from the labview "Getting Started" screen (from any drive including C:\). It doesn't happen every time (maybe 1 in 20) and after pressing "retry" it will load the file. It happens in all LV versions and on different machines. I know there were murmurs a while back about seeing this in LV 2010 (with no resolution from what I could tell) but like I said. One of the machines has a 2 year old copy of LV2009 on it (and that's been rock-solid until now). Anyone else experiencing this or knows why this happens?

Your signal is 20ms (50Hz). That's mains leakage (either in your source or in the USB supply). Change the source to a battery and see if it goes away. If it doesn't, send back the unit and get a replacement.

Oh, I don't know. Quite possible with Labview distributions I was talking more in context with IEC61850 rather than the OPs requirement (but I can see that I wasn't clear on that). It seems, from a casual perusal ,that it (IEC61850) is targeting similar requirements to Ethercat (the 4ms deterministic messaging - Fast Transfer of events requirement for example). In this scenario, I can see UDP multicast being very useful.and much easier for a device to "register" for messaging or "listening" for status events rather than the controller opening specific connections (and the overheads in the controller associated with copying messages to multiple clients).

There is a VI in the "\vi.lib\utilities\lvdir.llb" called "Get Base Labview Directory.vi". With it you can get the common/user locations that labview uses (like "C:\Users\<user_name>\Documents\LabVIEW Data"

Indeed. However that "tried and proven" doesn't extend to multicast and a control/monitoring system could definitely take advantage of that. That said. This type of requirement is what Ethercat is for.

From what I can tell, most of those are "antonyms" although it's difficult to classify "commander toady"

Whilst I think this is a great idea. I am somewhat skeptical that the back-end issues reporting/analysis is best written in LabVIEW (PHP/Javascript and an Apache server with MySQL would be my first choice). Perhaps I live on the wrong forum However. If you need any help with DB stuff...... I'm in

On the surface (from your description). it is a "many-to-one". So that really means Queue. My generic approach is to have multiple autonomous servers/processes/modules handling their own acquisition and placing data (after computation if necessary but sometimes to another module for crunching) onto a single "logging" queue. This "logging Queue (running also as a separate module/process) then saves data to a SQLite DB whenever there is something on the Queue. The DB can be queried in any which way you choose (between times, for a channel etc). Of course. Throughput is a consideration (how fast are you logging?) in which case the DB could be TDMS, however, it becomes much more difficult to extract the info once saved and you end up trading off resolution for convenience..

Really? .........