ShaunR

Set the vi to subroutine (assuming you are using a sub-vi vi in a for loop) and you'll probably halve those times

Nothing in comparison to dynamic dispatch.

Well. I thought I'd get my hands dirty and take the xnode apart. You are right. It doesn't just call moveblock. In fact, it doesn't call it at all!. It calls "GetValueByPointer" in "lvimptsl.dll" (that might call moveblock). But, more importantly (as you surmised), it does this in the UI thread (presumably because the dll isn't thread-safe). So. You're on a roll , That's the reason it's so slow (and totally unusable for 99% of my apps). But your suggestion works a treat

....done that...bought the tee-shirt.....

Thats ok. Just write a quick proxy filter to modify it on the fly (if your not using firefox). Make sure you add to the version info field "IT ARE ANALLY RETENTIVE NUMB-NUTS " (in capitals so it's easy to spot in their logs) Oh the joys of local admin privileges

The point is. Under windows. No dialogue based password system is 100% secure whether it's from NI or not (although I bet NI wouldn't have to spend as long as me circumventing VI passwords ) Password protection is like a key to your front door - it only keeps out law-abiding citizens Of course. I'm a law abiding citizen, so I would never consider circumventing NIs protection .

Well. I think that's a bit extreme. That's like saying it's not programming unless it's POOP . Whilst a network interface can be used to achieve decoupling. I don't think it's a requirement - just an implementation method,

I thought exactly the same until I had my 4th cup of coffee

The open vi reference will supply valid reference (ignoring projects for now). But the "compile" property will fail with 1040. (See attached) Nothing is password protected with time and soft-ice It just depends on how badly you want it (in most cases for me....not badly enough...lol)

Well. It's open source is it not? You only need to download the source and look at the function prototypes. It will also give you all the header files that you will need for passing structures.

I'll make a note and update the indicators- if/when I revisit them. As I say in the description, they were written in 1998 (many years before x64) and you are getting them "warts-'an-all". If you collapse the directory structure you will see that the windows DLLs are in the Root.. They are automagically added to the dependency tree by the project manager.

Probably the IT virus . Speak to your IT dept and ask hem if thy have done a restore recently.

Turning off "Loose fit" and "autoscale" not working for you? (since you are specifying the scale)

The for loop will execute the number of times of the elements in the smallest indexing array regardless of what you wire to the N terminal. The N terminal is only of consequence if you have no array indexing or if the value you wire is less than the smallest indexing array.. I expect one of your data arrays is only 1 element in length. This, for example, will only execute 3 times because the shortest indexing array is 3 elements long.

Naaah. 4 LDR's (2 per axis) driving the motors in proportion to the difference in intensity. Doesn't get simpler (or cheaper) than that and is self calibrating for lighting levels (ok. I'll give you the night , but the device will be pointing at the ground since its tracking the sun ) But the OP wants to use a camera with a pencil stuck through a piece of paper. So I would suggest a concentric rake which will give you the position (quadrant) and length in 1 measurement.

Don't tell me. Let me guess. You can only use their search if you have a paid subscription

Making customers pay for bug fixes is indefensible. Making a bug fix release that trashes your installation because you haven't paid is just plain boorish.

Also crashes on LV2009 SP1 x64 but not on LV2009 SP1 x32. (both Win 7 x64)

Why not?. I get the blame for everything else

Fantastic. Knew it had to be simple. I think the speed of the xnode stems from (apart from being an xnode) that its polymorphic. I wanted to use i in the SQLIte API but it was far to slow. But now I can add some more features. Many thanks.

Who is Loopy? And doesn't she mind?

So interesting that the OP (Cat) hasn't returned

Possibly Perhaps it was worded ambiguously since I did not mean to imply that the developer should never write any code to verify his software. But that it should not be used as the formal testing process. Most developers want to develop "bug free"software and it's useful for them to automate common checks. But I am promoting that this is for the developer to have confidence in his code before proffering it for formal acceptance. The formal acceptance (testing) should be instigated by a 3rd party that designs the test from the documentation, and that reliance on the developers test harness for formal acceptance is erroneous for the previously stated reasons. I think this is probably where we diverge My view is, "that" set of tests is irrelevant.. It is always the "customer" that designs the test (by customer I mean the next person in the deliverables chain - in your case, I think, production) The tests are derived from the documentation and it is the principle that you have two separate and independent thought processes checking the software. One thought process at the development level and - after RFA (release for acceptance) - one at the acceptance level. I think I should point out that when I'm talking about acceptance in this context, I just mean that a module or identifiable piece of code is marked as completed and ready to proceed past the next gate. If the the test harness that the developer produced is absorbed into the next level after the gate, then you lose the independence and and cross check. If it didn't pass the developers checks (whether he employs a test harness or visual inspection or whatever) then it wouldn't have been proffered for acceptance - the developer knows it passes his checks.

Thats probably why we disagree so often. Complex requirements cam be broken down into many simple solutions that together solve the complex one.