infinitenothing

Network streams give you a few things: 1) TCP's guaranteed delivery can be foiled by the OS. I know in some cases you can pull the cable and one side will not get an error because it put the message in the OS buffer but the other side will obviously fail to get the message. It's a little tricky at this point to figure out exactly which messages need to be transmitted. I believe network streams can tolerate that disconnect. 2) Explicit buffer sizing at the application layer. TCP uses buffering at the OS layer which is much harder to poke into. Of course, with network streams, memory use is really bad with variable sized messages so YRMV. 3) A flush method. This comes in handy if you want the host to do something smart when a message takes too long to get to the other side. This is also useful in cases where the host and client are developed by two different parties and the sender wants to prove their transmission. You can of course roll your own with TCP but that's one more thing TBD. 4) "Connected" property node. I'm guessing there's some sort of heartbeat underneath. You're totally allowed to ignore this

I keep up with the latest so that if NI breaks some functionality I can be loud and obnoxious and hopefully get things fixed in a future version. My thanks goes to all the other early adopters. Oh, but I use the single seats and just pay for the SSP each year. It's just a cost of doing business as I see it.

I DMed you but I was more looking for a process than a solution to my particular problem. By process I mean for example, who's the backup for the account manager? Who can tell me if the TSE is out of the office? Those are my usual "go to"s

Is there a certain protocol for escalating support issues? I'm calling in on my service request daily now—it goes straight to voicemail. I added a note and emailed almost a week ago. My account manager was CCed. How do I get someone to talk to me?

How do you figure out the dependencies? My eyes just glaze over when I look at this screen:

Can you rank these three options? Specifically, I'm looking at what are the best options for avoiding mem copies of the string. Is the "swap value" primitive buying me anything?

I'm imagining a collaboration where one developer develops the code and a different developer develops and tests the installer. The only problem I see with this is by default, there's just one lvproj file with both the code and the installer build spec in it so both developers would be working on the same "file". It might be possible to make two lvproj with the build spec in one and the installer in the other. Or maybe the code developer delivers a packed project library to the installer developer? Has anyone gone down one of these paths?

I was actually just pointing out that the employees of the integrators have had a reasonable amount of training and experience and are possibly an undervalued source of talent worth reaching out to. I'm not sure why you guys are all up in arms about ethics. There's nothing wrong with offering someone a job at better pay. That's just natural market efficiency. It didn't occur to me that you might have the opportunity to hire someone from an integrator you are already working with (I was assuming you didn't have an integrator already) but if that was the case, any ethical issues should codified in the contract you signed with the integrator.

While I'm extracting "secrets" Unicode in 2022? (Nods hopefully looking to others to assure me everything is going to be OK)

Find your local integrator and poach anyone that's been there for a few years. Basically, the integrators like to "train on the job" so the customers are effectively paying for the training. You can usually out pay the integrator for talent because they have to maintain margins on their contract hourly rates.

When is LV2021 being released? Seems a bit odd to get everyone excited and then not have the product immediately available.

Not checking the signature seems like a potential security risk as someone could swap in a tampered PLL and potentially the caller wouldn't notice and that "hack" could go undetected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrary_code_execution Also I noticed the PPL can use VI server to monitor/manipulate it's caller. Here's an example VI that could be injected into a PPL VI. It seems to me that a PPL shouldn't get access to its caller.

I'm still watching the presentation. I didn't realize it was at the same time as the "digital transformation" presentation. I'm curious to see how well the Git integration works. Also, I don't understand how the "chat pod" works. It made me think we need a discord channel.

What about the "in place" structure for a data value reference. What's the equivalent text based concept for a mutex wrapping some operation (for example increment by one) to make something "thread safe" For single element queues, how do I explain what dequeuing does? That it makes the other dequeuers and preview queures wait or timeout and that no two dequeuers can access at the same time. Is there a term or a simple code snippet that shows this behavior?

Is there a LabVIEW jargon to text based translation guide out there? I'd like to know what other developers call things like: (non)Reentrant Single element queue Data value reference Functional global I think there are some concepts I'm OK on: We call them clusters, they call them structs right? We have reasonable agreement on concepts like enums and global variables