ShaunR

Only 'cos you haven't written it......yet

All devices have different address maps for the PV. You will need to read the manual.

Only in Labview 2010. The format is https:// and "verify" must be set to "TRUE"

A lot of the information is stored in the registry. So a quick and dirty way would be to find it there.

Or un-check the "show warnings" when viewing this library Interestingly. If you change something (like mechanical action or the unbundle names). The warnings disappear............until you save it Think you may have found a feature.

OK. Here are some of my FOR (nots) using MAX. MAX is never installed it just bloats the installation and if it crashes, will take your whole measurement system down and you will get the telephone call not NI. MAX already has an interface which doesn't fit with either our or our customers "corporate" style requirements for software (logos etc) And having a GUI is normally easier for a customer to navigate and that's the last thing we want since they are neither trained or qualified to do these operations and we cannot poke-yoke it. MAX includes the ability to handle Scales of different types (linear, non-linear etc...) - but this cannot be updated from integrated databases and other 3rd party storage. Communicating with MAX is really easy using the Task-based API (through PNs etc...) because MAX sits in top of DAQmx so what we are really doing is configuring DAQmx. (So far) Clients seem to like using MAX - do they have an alternative? Its easy to back up your configuration and port it over to another PC etc. as it is with any other file based storage except text based files you can track in SVN. And some more.... Have to support more 3rd party software for which there is no source and have no opportunity to add defensive code for known issues Requires a MAX installation to do trivial changes as opposed to software available on most office machines (such as Excel, notepad etc). Does not have the ability to easily switch measurement types, scaling etc to do multiple measurements with the same hardware. MAX requires firewall access (I think) and this can be an issue with some anally retentive IT departments that decide to push their policies on your system.. As mentioned before above. Cannot integrate 3rd party storage such as SQL, Access, SQLLite, databases (mentioned again because it is a biggie). Or indeed automated outputs from other definitions (like specs) MAX assumes you have a mouse and keyboard. Its very difficult to use with touch-screens operated by gorillas with hands like feet.. But I think our customers are probably a bit different. They don't want to "play". they just want it to work!. And work 7 days a week, 24hrs a day. We even go to great lengths to replace the "Explorer" shell and start-up logo so operators aren't aware that its even windows. Our system is quite sophisticated now though. It can configure hardware on different platforms using various databases, text files, specification documents etc and it can be invoked at any time to reconfigure for different tests if there are different batches/parts. Its probably the single most re-used piece of code across projects (apart form perhaps the Force Directory vi... I tend to view MAX in a similar vein to express VIs. But that's not to say I never use it.

Give it a bash. I think you'll like it (drop it below 10ms or try about 10MB of data and see what happens). Then benchmark it against the Dispatcher

Agree with most of that. But especially the above. We usually create the channel associations at run-time in a similar manner to this:

That's a bit like saying you shouldn't use the GetTickCount because it does not have error terminals. The main two arguments behind global variables is that they make debugging difficult and cause race conditions across vi boundaries as well as within a vi. The use of an error cluster or not is irrelevant (I think). If you mean a choice between a global variable or shared variables. Then in-line with the ant-globalisation (lol) posse then neither should be used since they are both global variables and this is a sin I agree. Ooops. No I don't Or maybe I do I agree I am never going to use a NPSV in a time critical loop (and by time critical I mean on a real-time NI system). And I agree (on a real-time NI system) I am "probably" going to use the SPSV. But I am not going to use either in normal LV unless I want easy network comms (well. not even then ....).

Yep. Mine runs on coffee

Reminds me of the Al Gore "hocky stick" graph. Are we also responsible for increased global warming since 2000?

I think you are all missing the point. The OP was questioning the difference between global variables and shared variables in a single process system. In fact. The argument against global variables is exactly the same for SV's (SV's are "SUPER global variables). SV's have a network feature and that is the only reason people (should?) use them (but they have limitations that make them unusable in some applications.). They were designed for real-time targets but moved over to mainstream labvVew as an "easy" network comms.

If you save it as a single precision float you will save 50%, you won't have to do integer scaling and you will have a much better approximation. Depends how much disk space is important. Apart from that I'm not really sure what you are asking here. The answer "show it on a graph" seems too simplistic.

All You Need To Know

+1 My bookmark points straight to the last 24hrs

Here Ya Go. This'll put am sms into your unread box. You just need to send it then. This site is useful for common commands

We have Guidelines? Wow. Now having read them I thought it might be an idea to explain the "Rep System" under "Spread the Love".

I'm not over-enthusiastic about notifiers (after my initial enthusiasm in seeing the potential). They could have been fantastic for my everyday use but for one caveat. You actually have to be waiting for it to register the notification. You can't (for example) send a notification and when the wait executes, it continues and removes it from the notifier. It will just wait. This behaviour is no good for asynchronous systems since you cannot guarantee that a notifier will be waiting when you send the message. Wait with history doesn't cut it either since the wait will execute multiple times. So you end up synchronising the systems manually to ensure the wait is always executed first, which defeats the object.

Knarly one. You don't get this problem if you acquire a reference before waiting by the way.

Fat chance. I'm afraid of scripting remember

I feel your pain. But why limit it to classes?. Why not also be able to apply it to a load of VIs in a virtual folder. Or be able to select multiple VIs that you want to apply it too.

Talk to your sales rep or contact the regional office National Instruments Asean

That's what we're here for

What is it? What does it do and what is it for?