Jump to content

ShaunR

Members
  • Posts

    4,942
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    308

Posts posted by ShaunR

  1. The IMAQ USB library is ancient.. It was a quick fix before Measurement & Automation explorer supported USB and has many issues such as memory leaks and and the installer has issues with win7.

    I strongly suggest you use the measurement & automation explorer first and use the image libraries to interface to it.

    However.

    To stop the blinking you could try selecting "Synchronous Display" by right-clicking on the image indicator and selecting "Advanced>>Synchronous Display".

    If that fails then you are probably receiving incomplete/corrupted packets or you are timing out, reading nothing and then updating the display..

    The second one is so slow because you have put a 500ms wait in the loop and a receive time-out of 500 ms.Remove the wait ms and use the default time-out (i.e don't wire it)

    • Like 1
  2. No probs - just my luck!

    Thought I'd warn others tho.

    I saw the diagram before I closed it.

    So where did you get it? Or did you script it yourself?

    My own creation.

    I thought if /f I really must go to all the effort of downloading, installing, activating and navigating the script stuff. I might as well have some fun :P

  3. Sweet!

    I just opened the VI (which is set to run by default) and when I closed it, it crashed my LabVIEW (2009)

    I had a project opened too.

    Thanks! blink.gif

    Ouch.

    Sorry.:worshippy:

    Isn't meant to. And I tried it in 2009 x32 and x64 and had no problems.

    My 2009 is known for sudden fits of crashing like just deleting stuff off the diagram. Try again?:(

    Diagram looks like this:

  4. Ok then, replicate the code that I have that can handle changing both a control to an indicator and a constant to an indicator.

    How many cases would you need for that w/ the string based implementation?

    Well. For controls ........none. Since I wouldn't use any of them. I'd use something like this:

    I can't remember off-hand how to get th BD reference (cannot seem to find it in the list). I'll have to dig into my old code

    for a refresher example (is it only available if scripting is installed and activated?).

  5. Hi Eric

    I certainly have been following your work (and with Ton too).

    In fact, in the readme above you will see I included you in the acknowledgements (and made a mention in video).

    I did see your code where you save the VI but I did not want to do that in this case, or handle new-VI (unsaved) case.

    The reason for this tool was that I wanted to speed up my workflow when I insert a state.

    This was probably the thing that takes me the longest to do.

    Do you have any ideas in mind for other tools with respect to JKI State Machine?

    Cheers

    -Jon

    Maybe worth exploring. But if you edit the case name after insertion (say insert a space then delete it). The broken arrow disappears.

    • Like 1
  6. Shaun, I agree that having the Class Available in the case selector would be better and maintain the robustness and flexibility of the pattern, but that requires a new type of stacked frame structure in LV to exist outside of a feature request

    It was a trivial point but I think it improves readability immensely. And (probably in the minority again....but) I will choose readability over elegance if performance is not impacted..

    No, I'm saying w/ the design pattern, you don't have to make a special unique case for the XYGraph at all because the cast to WaveformGraph will not fail.

    But I want it to fail. Because it means I have given due consideration to an unexpected behaviour and therefore is a part of the designed behaviour. In the absence of similar behaviour in other classes, I almost view this as a NI implementation oversight (and therefore all methods more of a bug fix) rather than a design pattern to be used generically for accessing objects. In most cases (where things are as they should be) it's a performance hit since the probability is that you will be trying invalid cases before stumbling onto the correct one is high. If all t saves is 1 case. Then I see no reason to switch from an accepted, proven method to a shiny new method that may have performance hits and is (slightly) less readable. You'll have to give me more than that ;)

    (What are the benchmarks comparisons like out of interest? If you don't have time, post an everyday example and I''ll do them)

    But as you've seen, not all common properties in class trees are common

    All are as I'd expect EXCEPT graphs.

    Excuse me?? What?? Um, U B mistaken sir. XYGraph is a child of WaveformGraph

    Excused! :lol:

    Indeed I was. (It was late/early is my excuse and I'm sticking to it :D)

    But my point (perhaps explained better after the sleep) was that I didn't need to create a case for EVERY class and subclass. And my memory from over 11 months ago, was that I didn't have t deal with subclasses. It turns out that was because of the consistency of implementation of the property node (In fact to handle any control in PassaMak only required 4 cases. So that's only 1 more than you have above.....for all of 'em)..

    You give me far too much credit sir.

    Working in the tower has it's perks, but not the midas touch of LV wisdom.

    Although easy access to the 3rd floor is damn nice.

    Well. Get banging on the floor, tool up your Pikachu with an Uzi and tell them to sort the Graph class out :D

    SO.... this gets to the heart of your argument and the weakness in my example.

    I stand by my example as a good simple case of showing why the string based operation fails and if someone was trying to make some generic code for waveform graphs they would easily miss the XYGraph case and need to go back and re-code

    Well I didn't miss it. And I didn't miss digital graphs either ;)

    But. The string based system doesn't "fail". If you hadn't thought about the waveform graph or waveform chart, yours would "fail" too. I'm looking at the graph example and all I can see is that you are replacing a nested case structure with an iteratively nested case structure. Perhaps I need a different perspective?.:blink:

    BUT!!! Where this code really shines is while doing LVScripting, where you end up with an array of GObject often and need to operate on a variety of types which a common ancestor with the needed functions can not be assumed or found.

    EXAMPLE:

    Hmmm. Now I see no difference between the "string" based system and this one apart from the "string" one will always do it first time, every-time (if it can) but this method has to try a few different ones before either it hits one that works or it runs out of options. Same number of cases because there is no common denominator and each operation has different properties and methods.

    It seems to me that the graph example is indeed a one-off scenario where you save 1 case.

    By all means, keep using the 'Class Name' based selection of your code, but I believe you will find that, although it potentially meets your needs immediately, you have introduced a point of weakness into your code that unnecessarily would need modification to handle cases not originally though of. But why would you?

    How can you handle cases not originally thought of? :cool: If that were possible, you wouldn't have to add the extra cases because it can handle stuff you don't think about :D Moreover. If you haven't thought about them,how do you know it will handle them correctly?

    (Wavey lines, Soft fade.....)

    Many moons ago, in a galaxy far, far away. We used to use a similar approach for instrument identification. The SCPI spec was fluid and manufacturers all had their own way of identifying their device (to some extent that's still true today).. So we would have a list of all the ident commands for all the instruments we supported and try each one in turn until either we ran out or found one that worked Sales called it "Auto-detection". We called it the BFI method (Brute Force and Ignorance) :rolleyes:. It was slow and cumbersome and with hindsight, didn't obtain the holy grail of "future proofing" that many believed. It also had a really annoying habit that if a customer happened to stick on an unsupported device that had the same ident command. it'd make them think it was compatible but fall over because the rest of the command set wasn't the same. Eventually, we decided to make it a maintenance issue and that if they swapped out a device for a different one they'd just select it from a drop down list, It was faster, cleaner, easier to maintain and also meant that "if it 'aint on the list, it 'aint getting in".

    Does this have anything to do with The "Any Cast Design Pattern"? Probably not. But but I'm having flashbacks :D

  7. Do you want to be friends? tongue.gif

    OK. Added:D

    I agree, that they should not sold as major upgrades. (unless warranted).

    But I don't think NI was promoting the 2010 release as: individual ideas = individual major features.

    IMHO the major feature was the Idea Exchange itself and how NI has a strong (web based) mechanism in place for collecting customer feedback that is cycled into the product releases.

    The new changes were just evidence of this.

    At the end of the day, we (the customers) voted for (most of) those features - democratically speaking.

    Indeed. The really astounding (is that the right word?) aspect of it is that NI REALLY DO listen to thier customers and the changes are the evidence.

  8. Allright I voted, however I think that NI should not only implement the easy ideas from the Idea Exchange.

    Basically all the ideas implemented are 'low hanging fruit', I would be ashamed to name those new 'changes' as the major upgrade feature (as NI is currently doing).

    Ton

    Oh, I don't know. I think some of the changes are really useful (like clusters as control-type icons). But they all seem to be cosmetic changes. So whilst I like the idea of a cleaner diagram, I would (as I think you are suggesting) prefer to see the more meaty ones implemented that enhance the program rather than the prettiness of the diagram.

    Or maybe that's a sign in itself. That we are having to spend too much time making diagrams "look" good instead of making functional code.:ph34r:

    But I think Aristos' suggestion is an excellent one (and long overdue). I use it a lot and it would save be bags of time.

    I'm in the same boat as jgcode so I'll have to create 3 more accounts and hire a medium :lol:

  9. Having slept on it (after all wise words from NI are never to be taken lightly). I thought I'd better to refresh my memory.

    Unfortunately I seem to have remembered correctly (what? No crying emoticon?) as this works as I would expect

    However, Plot color isn't available, yet it is still common to all plots.

    Which brings me back to the summation that you have really highlighted a problem of inconsistency of the property node for waveform types since this also works.

    So. You don't have to create a case for every class and subclass. Only the parent (if at all). Apart from some properties of waveforms (there maybe others but waveforms are the only one I've come across).

  10. Functionally I don't think it's any different, but there's a HUGE difference in readability.

    Really? Its easier to read 0,1,2,3... than WaveFormGraph, WaveformChart, XYGraph... ?

    (Personally I really dislike nested case structures. The logic is too hard to understand at a glance. If I can I'll usually execute all the logic tests, put the results in a boolean array, convert it to a number, and wire that into the case structure. Then I drop a comment explaining the logic. It's much easier for me to check the code that way.)

    I find nested case structures abhorrent. I must admit I didn't even consider the nested error example a solution :P Even a case structure with many cases causes me to look for an for an alternative. Its the same argument as Sequence Structures. If the case number is small (<6), I'd much rather use a select so its all out in the open. For more then I will try for strings unless its numerical in nature in which case I will do the same as you.

    Oh, and without going back and watching the videos again, what was the first word Norm said on all four of the videos? ;)

    ummmm. "So"? :yes:

    You did not see what happened with the XY graph did you?

    Thought I did :unsure:

    You would have to account for EVERY possible child string.

    EVERY CLASS NAME.

    If you had some VI that had a GObject come into it's terminal,

    you would need to manually enter the 'Class Name' for EVERY Class Name of EVERY child class that you wanted to handle.

    You mean the difference is that instead typing in the class name you wanted to handle you, would just "Copy Case" and change the cast constant instead?

    If GObject was the input and you wanted to do a bunch of operations on all, or even a subset, of numerics types,

    you would have to figure out every class name possible,

    and then type it in perfectly in the case selector,

    and then hope and pray that NI doesn't release another item in the GObject tree that now your code won't work with.

    Not really. Because unlike graphs the a property node accepts all the numeric classes for the common properties.

    It's all about Scalability, robustness & re-usability. You do not get that w/ the string

    Certainly waveformchart,waveformgraph and xygraph don't have child classes. Neither do boolean, cluster etc

    Numeric types are consistent (whether they be a U16, DBL, slider, knob,gauge or whatever) since all the common properties can be wired to the same property node. The graphs, however (I think) are the exception and it is only because the property node doesn't allow it (which it should) means that you have to handle them differently. I found that out when writing PassaMak.

  11. Hmmm.

    I don't really see he difference between your using the class name "problem" example and using an iterative apart from the class name has a descriptive case name and the iterative "trial and error" just has 0,1,2 etc. You still have to have a case to handle the particular type to do the correct cast but with the iterative approach you have to try all the previous ones first before deciding its not supported. With the class name its either supported or not.

    Is there another benefit I'm missing?

  12. So all we're talking about here is having the hooks added and possibly Darren's code or ours should we choose, right?

    If you code monkeys force me to 4224 instead of 5335 and tag .ctl or .lvclass on the end of all of my controls more than you already do, I'm going to take my pikachu down to the 3rd floor and demonstrate some hand to hand knife fighting moves on him.

    http://twitpic.com/2c6s2s

    Don't forget all the documentation :P

  13. Hi Shaun,

    It was definitely financial reasons that I chose the 12v dc pump (I bought it on ebay for 20euro:P)! Otherwise I probably would have tried to get a 3 phase or something like that.

    Anyways, as it turns out I'm finished - I had my project presentation Wedsnesday afternoon. It went very well - I got the PID & PWM working, thanks to the help of my project supervisor during the presentation (it was a pretty informal affair!). I wasn't far off, thanks to all the information from you and this site but it was just putting it all together in labview where I fell down. We ended up using a simulate signal block for the PWM. We installed this 1st into my basic program with just the input driving the output, and put a control on the duty cycle to set our pulses, and also set the samples per second, offset, frequency. We then managed to wire in the simple PID subvi, and it was just a matter of trial and error with the PID values. In the end, when a setpoint was entered it held very well going by the double needle meter, and the PID response was quite good. This could have probably been bettered but I was happy enough to get as far as I did with this. You probably think that I have a softie for a supervisor;) but I think he saw that I had all the pieces of the puzzle, just not in the right order!! Thanks again anyways Shaun - I have posted the working vi just in case you were intrigued how I got on. I'm sure it's pretty simple to you:worshippy:.

    P.s - Taking a break from Labview for a while. My results are out Monday. That will be level 7 complete(pass degree or diploma), but I will probably be back to this site when I attempt level 8 of the course...

    Take it easy,

    Rich

    Glad to hear it. Congrats. Always easier when someone is sitting in front of you (that knows the exam answers :P)

    I noticed wired up the duty cycle to the simulator ;)

  14. So then what is reinterpretation? And why does reinterpreting require a temp buffer, and transformations do not?

    Well. I would tentatively suggest the others are reinterpretation (dbl to uint64 is reinterpreting the bits to form an equivalent value).

    Why does it need a buffer? Don't know :unsure: Implementation specifics that I'm glad I don't have to worry about. But I would guess a temporary buffer may be required as an intermediate step in the conversion process since the new type cannot be represented by a union (c terminology) of the memory locations unlike a transformation..

    And before you ask ;) I still have no idea no idea what 4.x data is either :D other than a vague recollection that it was something to do with a change in internal representation between LV versions some time ago..

    where's Rolf when ya need him :lol:

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.