ShaunR

Without requiring the spawned task (subVI) to post a message to a queue, can the top level application that spawned the task detect that the subVI exited? That is, if the top level application opens a reference to a vi (using a VI template) and then runs it. When it runs it it doesn't wait for the VI to complete so it truly spawns a new task. I tried catching the spawned task's close using the Application Close and Panel Close events but neither detect the close. I know that I could have the subVI generate a user event or post a message to the queue but I was trying to catch the exit in an autonomous manner. I wanted to avoid having to pass anything to the subVI (the user event reference or queue name) as well as avoid the spawned task from knowing that it was invoked by another VI. In C when you fork a process you can catch the signal when it exits without the spawned task needing to do any special processing on it's exit. It would seem like we should be able to do this but so far I haven't found it.

Check the "VI's in memory" list?

That's another story... I'll do it soon. Here is some preview

Can't wait for the Labview version of Halo

It seems that the amount of work involved isn't proportional to the price you're suggesting. Why so much? I can't afford it

If it is full blown implementation then it is a lot of work. I think, however, most people only need/use the basics. I just hope its not ADO or .NET.

Too bad they don't have something that goes the other way.

I wonder how well this actually works.

I assume its an offshoot from their embedded tool kits (you can't run LV on for example an ARM processor). where you write stuff in LV and it generates the C code which you then have to compile using a C compiler. The other way round would be awesome.

Can't wait for the JKI Virus Scanner

For the sensor, I'd probably go for something like this. USB to rs232 lead to get it into the PC and there are pre-shipped examples for serial comms in LV. Only £20 too

Ultrasonic devices work much better than light devices outdoors and are not as susceptible to things like dust and dirt.

I just realized I'm about to hit 500 posts on LAVA. I would have probably preferred if #500 was a deep treatise on some esoteric feature of LabVIEW that will change the programming world as we know it. But we all know that ain't happening anytime soon. Maybe post #1000...

Cat

Do we get cake?

Where can I buy one of those buttons? And does it come with LV drivers?

See, this is just more proof I'm not a true LV geek.

So what are you trying to say Cat eh?

I've used the Sick LMS200 before - it's a pretty neat sensor that's easy to integrate with: http://www.pages.dre.../sick/sick.html

$5,771.42

For that price I'd expect it to take out scud missiles from 10 km

Hello there...

Actually i doing a thesis about "Automated Car Parking System by using LabVIEW" ..

i have to design a system the can controlled a car in and out, counting and then will know have many parking left,

to make a driver feel convenient..

I have facing a problem to know how LabVIEW can detect physical system like sensor. and through the sensor can be a counter to counting a car in car park./

Hopefully, anyone which have a knowledge can share with me...

Thank you..

Labview is designed for interfacing to sensors.

What is your budget?

How much time do you have?

Can you build simple or complex electronic kits?

Can you program micro controllers?

Can you use a multi-meter?

Don't be frightened by the questions. I'm just trying to get an idea of your skills.

Hi all,

Where can I find the internet tool kit for LabVIEW 8.6(Internet toolkit 6.0.2)? I searched in NI site. But I cannot able to find it? Could you please help me for finding this?

I have 2010 toolkit. But no 6.0.2 for 8.6 version of LabVIEW

Thanks in advance,

Suresh Kumar.G

I believe 6.0.2 is the one shipped with LV2010. Its for versions 8.6 and above.

I have 3 machines at home. 2 are x64 1 is x32. One of the x64s has both x32 and x64 labview. I don't have any problems switching between OSs or labview. But there are some things to bear in mind.

32 bit dlls will work on a 64 bit machine, but you can't use LVx64 (must use LVx32t)

x64 dlls won't work at all on a 32bit OS. (you will get load errors if you try to use LVx32 to load them). Likewise 64bit applications written in LV will not work on a x32 machine.

LV must recompile between x32 and x64 every-time you load (the whole hierarchy) which might be a bit of a nightmare for your source control if switching to and fro.

Editing with LVx64 on a x64 OS is like lightning. LVx32 runs like a slug. Anything pure labview (like scripting) is totlay interchangeable. Install BOTH

Isn't the array intersection the result of the terms present in both arrays? You show the list of terms that are present at least in one, not both.

Indeed. It was a quick demonstration of a theory rather than a solution. If you change it like so......

Then you get unique intersection values for example.

There's no need to concatenate in a loop at all here. You know in advance that the intersection array cannot be larger than the smaller of the two input arrays, so you can preallocate an array of that size. Track the current array index in a shift register. Each time there's a match, use replace array subset instead of build array, and increment the array index. When the loop finishes, resize the array to the final value of the index shift register. This is much faster than concatenating in a loop.

Sweet. that'd be even faster

I thought I'd seen this problem bedore

Here is another method that's similar to your first one rather than the second. This VI (wrote it a while ago now) returns the array differences but the theory is the same.

Slightly different in that it actually does a search and eliminates data, therefore reducing the data set as it goes. Its very quick especially if the duplicates are sparse and isn't explicitly linked to the data-set size, rather the number of duplicates.

Array indexing inside a for loop is a killer. Actually concatenating isn't too bad due to optimisations (LV is very efficient with For-loops). I vaguely remember a challenge from Jim Kring to find a better method than concatenating for selecting arbitrary values from an array. I don't think there were any takers.

So assuming that we have to concatenate in some form or another the best we can hope for is pre-processing. Along this line what about finding turning points? Maybe faster, maybe not but it would uses in-build functions (generally faster than native LV) and eliminate the array indexing.

Hi all,

I've took a look at this and it seems, as far as I can see, the "NI implementation" is quite more complex due to the execution on RT target. SQLiteVIEW only needs sqlite3.dll (or .so for linux OS) to run. Our toolkit also provides way to improve query execution performance using statement features and we have lot of other useful features to add to improve the end-user development experience.

Stay tuned to evaluate our toolkit for free. We are looking forward to know your feelings about it.

Regards

Actually I would say the opposite..... Its too simple

But probably sufficient for most users. Why they went for an intermediate "wrapper" dll is beyond me. I guess NI has more C programmers than LV programmers nowadays (or maybe just lazy to implement the switching in LV). But the wrapper is only half a page (excluding comments, spacing) basically just opening, preparing and executing the SQL.

The fact that it supports RT targets isn't that complicated (conditional disable structure). But it overlooks a lot of DB functionality (parametrised queries for example).

I would ignore the RT targets at your peril. This is the only viable database solution available for RT and (IMHO) why most LV users are interested. And, as I intimated earlier, all you need is a conditional disable and a DLL compiled for the targets (that's where most LV users will come up against a brick wall if they want to "roll-their-own") . There are many FREE db solutions for windows and linux (don't forget MAC too)

You might also consider providing a "drop-in" replacement for the NI Database Toolkit to allow users to easliy switch/update to SQLite. Nothing sells a product quicker than an easy upgrade path

If your engineers are suggesting an implementation in .NET. Slap them for me please

OOP as in LVOOP as in LabVIEW OOP?

Hope you're pronouncing that correctly

Nope, its a LabVIEW thing

Nope. Its an OOP thing

I just figured the sound for audio recordings would not be as good as a PC Headset?

yer.. sure...

Sound isn't maybe as good. But that's what I've got a 200W stereo for

Mic isn't bad, fine for yahoo, skype, voice chat etc but not studio qualty. Don't forget they are heavily compressed and filtered to reduce bandwidth so even with a studio mic your gonna sound crap.

I use my phones bluetooth headset . Had it about 3 years and its the only mobile headset that stays in my ear Good range. Good quality. Good volume. Can't fault it for general purpose. Works with everything.

Movon MF120 http://www.prepaymania.co.uk/mobilephone/generic-movon-mf120-bluetooth-headset.html

Mine ISN'T pink by the way...lol.

Thanks. I should hang around LAVA more often.

Naaah. You probably have a real life

I want it now!

Then take a look at this